Skip to main content

Full text of "Transactions of the Linnean Society"

See other formats 


This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project 
to make the world's books discoverable online. 

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject 
to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books 
are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover. 

Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the 
publisher to a library and finally to you. 

Usage guidelines 

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the 
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to 
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying. 

We also ask that you: 

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for 
personal, non-commercial purposes. 

+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine 
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the 
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help. 

+ Maintain attribution The Google "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find 
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it. 

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just 
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other 
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of 
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner 
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe. 

About Google Book Search 

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers 
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web 



at |http : //books . google . com/ 



3<rr <fjt'^^j </ />^ o^ ^e^. JW^^ ^x/'-'- y^^ ,/>• ^'^'0 f/^?^) 



/ 



TRANSACTIONS 



OF THE 



LINNEAN SOCIETY. 



VOLUME I. 



LONDON: 

PRINTED BY J. DAVIS. 

SOLD BY BENJAMIN WHITE AND SON, FLEET-STREET. 

M.DCC.XCI. 



n 

\ 



( y ) 



ON T EN T S. 



L pfTRODUCrORr Difcourfeon the Rife and Progrefs of 
J- Natural Hifiory. By James Edward Smith, M. D, R R,S. 
Pr^fident ^ the Lintuan Society ' Page I 

IL Obfervations on fome extraneous Fqffih of Switxerland. Bjr 
Mr. Tingry, Foreign Member of the Limean Society^ Demon-' 
, Jirator of Cbemtftry and Natural Hifiory at Geneva^ &c. p. 57 

IIL Obfervations on the Pbahena Bombyx Lubricipeda of LinnauSf 
and fome other Moths allied to it. By Thomas Marfham, Bfq. 
Secretary to the Linnean Society . ■ ■ p* 67 

IV. Defcriptions of four Species of Cypripedhmu By Richard 
Anthony Salilbury, Ffy. F. R. S. Fellow of the Linnean 
Society ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ » p. 76 

V. Defcriptions of ten Species of Lichen^ colleffed in the South of 
Europe^ By James Edward Smith, M. D. F. R. S. Pr^ent 

of the Unngan Society ^ ■ , . p. 8l 

a YLSome 



VI 



CONTENTS- 



VI. Some Obfervations on the Natural Hijlory of the CurcuUo 
Lapaihi and Silpha grifea. By Mr. William Curtis, Fellow 

of the Linnean Society ~« • ■ -^ — = — ^ p. 86 

VII. Defcription of the Stylephorus chordatus^ a new fijh. By 
George Shaw, Af. 2). F. R. S. Fellow of the Linnean 
Society "j^ y ',] * ^ ^: () ^.\ 90 

VIII. Defcription of the Hirudo viridis^ a new Engli/h Leech. 

• By the fame ■ p. 91 

IX. ^fhe-mMcdi^f^S^^^^^ •:fi^i^^bf gViitz^ 
* M 'B: Member ^The'Royal Academy of ^Scfiftces of SUcHholfHy 

Foreign Member of the Linnean Society ■ p. 96 

■ ShUw, M/'^. sP/R';%/?'^^^ "-^ p. io^ 

XI. 'Oh the i^ejhcttcjpaiiic^a "iMd :Anihoicmthum • - 

'I ^ ofibe LinmarrSociety • ^. - •iiau.a-*- • • "p. 'l 1 1 

XIL Ow the MgraHdh '^ cenhin Bkds, and on other Matfets 
relating to the jhatherid'Trihes: • By WUliafti Markwickj J^l' 
Jffbciate oftSrtMnean SocieTy ' ' — i-^i-^ p. ^i8 

XIII. ^e Htjory and Defcription of a new Species of Futus. Sy ■ ■ 
Thomas Jenkihfbn Wdodward, Efq. FelloHv of the Linnean 
'Society ■■^-^— " — ii^~ ,— — , s-^^ p. i^j 

•0 XIV. ulccount 



q Q. 1^ T ^^ ^' r Sa, yii, 

XIV. jSecfjftii of (t Ji^ul<ti( Conformatm m /J^tt fTingt of. Jkme 
■ -Species of Motbs. ^y Mr^ Efprit Giprna, of Turint Foreign 

Member of the Lmnean Society — — — — p. 135 

XV. tfifer&ttiofii'onihe Z,afigui^e"of^ Botany: By Jhe kezf.' ' ' 
^ Thcifliias Martynl^ B. D. F. M S: Profyjcr of Botany in the '■ 

Vnwerjity of Cambridge^ Fellow of the Linnean Society ; in a Letter 
addreffedto the Prefident ■ " ■ . ■ p. 147 

'-. -.a . .,;.,..'.•■. •-....•• . >; •. . .1. ..;.••■• , .■/:'; 

XVI."'0^'3kw/fo«;<al ti^JGenusof Beg/i^, I^. JottsaVtfonder; : . 

M:A. l^r<:R^ $y and ^iSfnib'er of tbt Royal ^(^a^^^ ' 

of Stoeikotm^ l^dlowpf the Ijitfnean SKJety ! r— • p. 155 

XVII. On the Genus of Symplocos, comprehending Hopea and 
jlljima ,{£Smt,)y./^' C^Miim (Aifbl,); yfly,^^ piwfles.;/ -_ 
Louis L'Hei%ieri<^ tbt 4f4tlfftSl ^^f^hp^ff ^f PffW% forgjgft 
Member.^ iibit.Lmemt.Spcifty rrr. — > - - — p. 174 

XVIII. On the Genus of Calligonum^ ctmprehending Pterococcus 
(PalJaf.}at^PaUiifyt(LinnO* ^ythefam^. -r- .. IV J77 

XIX. Obfervationson Polypq^ium' Oreppteris\ qceorhpdnied with a ' 
Specimen from Scotland^ By Mr. James Dickfoi>, ^"Fellow of 

the Linnean Society ,— 7r-~ • ■ ■ " p. l8l 

XX. Account of afpinning Limax^ or Slug. By Mr. Thomas Hoy, 

of Gordon Caflle^ A£octate of the Linnean Society — ?• 183 

XXI. Defcriptions of three new Animals found in the Pacific Ocean. 
By Mr. Archibald Menzies, Fellow of the Linnean Society ' 

p. 187 

a 2 XXIL Remarks 



viii CONTENTS. 

XXII. Remarks on the Genus Feronica. By James Edward Smithy 

M D. F. R. 5*. PrefJent of the Lkmean Society — p. 189 

XXIII. Defiriptims of two. new Species of Pbalana, By M^, 
Louis Bofc,^ of Paris^ Foresgt\ Mrnher of the Limuan Society 

XXIV.* iTte Botanical Hifiory of the Genus DiUema^ with an 
Mdiiion of feveral nondejbript Species* By Ghailes Peter/ 
Thunberg, Kmgbt if tht Order ofWafa^ Prcfeffor of Botai^ 
and. Medicine in the Umverfxty of Upfal^ Foreign Memher of the 
Linneatt Society — — — — — — p. i|^ 

XXV. 755*' Botanical Hifiory of trifollttm alp^bi^r medium^ and 
pratenfe. By Adam Afiselius, M. A. l^emon/irator cfBotat^ m 
the Vmverjby ofVpfal^ Foreign Memher of the Limuan Society 

p» 20a 

XXVI. An Account of feveral Pleuas prefented tb the Society^ 
at d^trent Tmesy. by Mr, Joha Fairbaim and Mr, Thomas 
Hoy) Fellows of the Limuan Society, By the Prefident- p» 249r 

XXVII. Extract from the Minute Book of the. Society p»^ 255 



LIN- 



( i« ) 



LINNEAN SOCIETY. 

This Mark f is prefixed to the Names of fuch Members u ait deccafed* 



HONORARY MEMBERS^ 

Su JOSEPH BANKS» Bart. Prefidita of the itayal Society. 

HENRY, Earl of GAINSBOROUGH. 

The Marechai de NOAILLES.. 



F E.L L O W $• 

James EowAai> Smith,. M. D. Phesidbht, F. R. S. Acad. Reg. Sc. 

^aum. Dilphhtk necnon Soc^JBJt. Nat. Paris. Socius. Uliffip. Agrm. Paris. 

BotoHopb. Aadegav. Corrtjp.. 
Mr. George Adams, Fkec- Street; 
Robert Barclay, Efq. Glapbkm. 
Mr. John.Beckwitb, Spitalfields. . 
James Crowe, Efq. Nbrwiclu 
Sir Thomas Gery Cullum, Bart. F. R. S. Biiry; 
Mr. WilKam Curtis, St. George's Crefcent. 
Edmund Davall, Efq. Orbe, in Switzerland, 
The Rev. Hugh Davies, Reftor of Aber^ North Wales. 

Mi;.' 



( ^ > 

Mr. James Dickfon, Covent-Garden. 

Jonas Dryander, M. A. Librarian, Ubr. to the Rcn^. Soc. Acad. Reg. Sc. 

Stockholm, et Soc. Htji. Nat. Paris. Soc. Dcah-Street, 
Samuel Ewer, Efq. Crooms Hill, Greenwich. 
Mr. John Fairbairn, Chelfea Garden. 
John Ford, M. D. Bond- Street. 
Samuel Galton, Jtin. Efq, F. R. 8. Birmiiigbanj, 

The Rev. Samuel Goodenough, LL. D. Treasurer, F. R. S. Ealing. 
William Hanbury, Efq. Kilmarfli, Nortfaamptoii(hire« 
Mr. Thomas Hoy, Sion Houfe. 
Mr. William Hudfon, F. R. S. Jermyn-Street. 
Aylmer Bourke Lambert, Efq. F. R. S. Saliibury. 
Mr. John Latham, F. R. S. Dartford.^ 
John Latham, M. D. Eflex- Street. 

GfiiORGE VifcouiitLBwisHAM, F. R, S. H^yex., ; --* , 

^ The Rev. John Ughtfoot, M. A. F. R. S. Usbricjga- 
The Rev. John Lyon, Dover. 
Thomas Marsham, Efq. Secretary, Upper Berkley- Street, Portmaa 

Square. 
The Rev. Thomas Martyn, B. D. F. R. S. Prof. Bot. Cambridge, Park 

Profpedt, Weftminfter. 
Mr. Archibald Menzies.- ' . • . . 

Richard Molcfworth, Efq. F. R. S. Dorfet-Couft. 
The Rev. Edmund Poulter, Portman-Square^ 
Richard Powel, B. A. Merton College, Oxford. , 

Richard Pulteney, M. D. F. R. S. Blandford,. Dorfet. 
The Rev. Richard Relhan, M. A. F. R. S. Cambridge. 
John Rotheram, M. D. 

Richard Anthony Salifbury, Efq. F. R. S. Chapel Allerton, near Leeds. 
George Shaw, M. D. F. R. S. Britifli Mufcum, 
John Sibthorp. M. D. F. R. S. Prof. Bot. Oxford, Soc. Reg. Mmfp. et Gotting, 

Correjp. Soc. Hiji. Nat. Paris. Soc. Oxford, 
John Sims, M. D. Patcmoftcr-Row. 

The 



( w ) 

The Rev, Hanrcy Spragg, Wclbcck-Strect. 

Sir George Leonard Staunton^ Bart. F. R. S. Beroers-Street* 

Robert Stone, Efq. Bungay. 

Mr. John Timothy Swainfon, DoVer*Place. 

Mr. Robeit Tcefdalc, Ranelagh. 

William Watfon, Efq. F. R. S. Bedford Square, 

Jofeph Windham, Efq. F. R. S. Portland-Placc. 

The Rev. William Wood, Leeds. 

Thomas Jenkinfbn Woodward, Efq. Bungay. 

William Woodville, M. D. Bartholomew- L-anc, 

William Younge, M. D. Sheffield, 

Mr. John Zier, Raaelagh-Street^ Pimlico. 

FOREION MEMBERS. 

D. Adam Afzelius, A. M. Botan. Demonftr^ U^^l. 

D. Carolus AUioni, M. D. Soc. Reg. Land. See. £oi. Prof. Emer. G? Acad. R. 

Scient. Taurin. Soc. 
D. Petrus Arduino, Oecon. Prof, Patav^ 
D. Antonius Bannal, Hort. Reg. Monfp. Cuftos. 
D. Ludovicus BeUardi, M. D. Coll. Med. Taurin. Soc. 
D. J. P. Berthout Van Berchem, 59(?r. P^g/l Laufann. Soc. 
D. Jacobus Julianus La Billardicfe, 'M. 2). Parifiis. 
D. Ludovicus Bofc, Parifiis. 
D. P. M. Auguftus Brouflbnet, M. D. Soc. Reg. Land. Ac Reg. Sc. Paris. 6f 

Monfp. SociuSy Soc. Reg. Oecon. Par. h Secretis. 
D. Csefar Caneferi, Af. D. Gcnuse. 

D. Antonius Jofephus Cavanilles, Societ. R^g. Sc. Uffal^ So^c. Madriti, 
D. Philippus Cavolini, Acad. Reg. Sc. Neap. Soc. 
D. Jacobus Cels, Soc. Bft. Nat^ Paris. Praf. 

D. Jofephus Correa de Serra, J. U. D. Acad. Reg. 'Sc. Vlyji i Secretis. 
D. Rodorigus de Soufa Coiitinho, Legatus Regln. Zuftt. ad Reg.Sardin.' 
D. Dominicus Cyrilli, Prof. Tberap. in Lgceor Neap. 
D. Johannes Pet. M. Dana, Uifi-. Nat: Prof. Cs? Ac. R. Sc. Taurin. Soc. 

D. Renatus- 



( xii ) 

D. Rcnatus Louiche Desfontaincs, M. D. Bot. Prof. Ac. Reg. Se. Paris. Scic. 

Pariliis. 
D- Jacobus Anfelmus Dorthcs, M. D. See. Reg. Sc. MonJ^. Soc. 
X>* Hippoliius Durazzo, Patricius Genoenfis. 
D. Felix Fontana, BireSlor Muf. PhjJ. Reg. Fkrent. 
D. Ludovicus Gerard, M.D. Cotiignac, Gallo-Pro\ inciac, 
D. Efprit Giorna, Xaurina?. 

D. Antonius GoUan, M. D. Med. Prof. Soc. Reg. Sc Monfp. Soc. 
D. Johannes Theoph. Grofchkc, M. D. Hi/. Nat. Prof. Miiav.. 
D. Carolus Ludovicus L'Heritier, Ac. Reg. Sc. Paris. Soc. 
D. Johannes Herman, M. D. Med. Cbenu ^ Mat. Med. Prof. Argenter. 
D. Antonius Ludovicus de Jufficu, Acad. Reg. Sc. Parif. Soc. 
D. Jofephus Francifcus a Jacquin. 
D. Nicolaus Jofephus a Jacquin, Soc. Reg. Lond. Soc. Bot. et Cbem. Prof. 

Vindob. 
D. Wcrnerus dc Lachenal, Prof. Bot. Baftl. 
D, Lambertus Lucas Van Meurs, Anat. Pr^leSl. Amjielod. 
D. Aubin Ludov. Millin, Soc. Hiji. Nat. Paris, i Secretis. 
D. Gulielmus Antonius Olivier, M. D. Acad. Reg. Sc. Maffil. Socius^ Soc. 

Agron. Parif. Correff. Parifiis* 
D. Nicolaus Pacifico, Acad. Reg. Sc. Neap. Soc. 
D. Johannes BaptiAa Pratolongo fil. M. D. Genua:. 
D..Dc Reynicr, Soc. Pb^. Laufam. Soc. 

D. David Van Royen, Soc. Reg. Lond^ Sojc. Bot. Prof. Emerit. Lugd. Bat. 
D. Ant. Scarpa, Soc. Reg. Lond. Soc. Anat. Prof. Ticin. 
D. J. G. Schlanbufch, Regi Danue i CuUcidis. 
D. Chriftianus Frid. Schumacher, Acad. Reg. Cbirurg. Hafn. AdjunSfus. 
^ D. Johannes Antonius Scopoli, Cbem. 6? Bot. Prof. ^icin. 
D. Andreas Sparrnuui, M. D. Acad. Reg. Sc. Stockholm. Soc. ^ 

D. Olaus Swartz, M. D. Acad. Reg. Sc. Stockholm. Soc. 
D. Nicolaus Sam. Swederus, Regi Suec. h Sacris. 
JD. Thibaud, M. D. Monfpelii. 

D. Tbouin, Acad. Reg. Sc. Parif. Soc 

P. Carolus 



( xiii ) 

D. Carolus Petrus Thunberg, M. D. Eqtu Ord. ff^afiaci, Sec. Reg. Lend. Soc. 

Med. &? Boi. Prof. V^al. 
D. Tingry, Cbem. FraleR. Genev. 
D. Oftavian.TargioniTozzetti, M. D. Florentise. 
D. Ericus Viborg, Artis Veterin. Profejfor Hafn. 
D. Villars, M. D. Gratianopoli. 
D. Philippus Werner, Chirurg. Algiriae. 
D. Willemet, Bot. Prof. Nanc. 
D. Jacob. Samuel Wyttenbach, S. 7*. P. Bernje. 
D. Ebcrh. Aug. Guil. Zimmermann, Phyf. Prof. Brunjvic. 

ASSOCIATES. 

Mr. William Boys, F. A. S. Sandwich. 

Francis Buchannan, M. D. £a{l-Indies« 

William Coyte, M. D. Ipfwich. * 

\ Mr. Thomas Spence Duche. 

Edward Whitaker Gray, M. D. F. R. S. Britifti Mufeum. 

John Heyfham, M. D. Carlifle. 

Thomas Hop^, M. D. Profejfor of Medicine, Glafgow. 

Mr. James Hoy, Gordon Caftle, Scotland. 

Mr. George Humphrey, Black-friars Road. 

Mr. Edward Hunter, Caen- Wood. 

The Rev. William Kirby, Barham. 

Mr. Thomas Lamb, Reading. 

The Rev. Peter Lathbury, Orford. 

William Markwick, Efq. Catsfield, near Battle. 

Mr. Robert Menzies, Edinburgh. 

Mr. John Pitchford, Norwich. 

Mr. Edward Robfon, Darlington. 

Mr. Charles Stewart, Secretary to the Nat. Hiji. Society, Edinburgh. 

Mr. William Sole, Bath. 

b Mr. 



( xiv ) 

Mr. James Sowcrby, Mead-Place, St. George's Fields. 
Jonathan Stokes, M. D. Kidderminfter, 
The Rev. Charles Sutton, B. D. Norwich. 
Walter Wade, M. D- Dublin. 
Mr. Lilly Wigg, Great-Yarmouth. 



INTRO- 



I" 1. 



INTRODUCTORY DISCOURSE 



ON THE 



RISE AND PROGRBSS 



OS 



NATURAL HISTORY. 



DBLirSKBD Br TBR PRBSIDJiNr, APRtC 5, 1 788. 



THE Study of Nature, that is an attentioa to the ground on 
"which we tread, the vegetables which clothe and adorn it» 
«nd the boundlefs variety of- living creatures prefenting themfelves 
to our notice on every fide, njuft have been one of the firft occu- 
pttions of man iil a>itate qf nature. In no country hitherto dif- 
covered, however b^barous and unenlightenedjis the human race 
found fo negligent and helplefs as not to. have invefligated the 
natural bodies abound tkem^ fo far at leaft as from thence to fupply 

H their 



2 Dr. SmithV IntroduBory Dtfcourfe. 

their neceffary wants, and even ta obtain conveniences and luxuriejw. 
In the more hofpitable climes in which probably mankind were 
firft eftablillied, this tafk was the more eafy. The calls of nature 
would there be readily fatisfied ; and while flie fenfes were gratified 
with all they were capable of enjoying, the mind, ever prone to 
curiofity, would be continually exercifed and delighted in invefti- 
gating the creation around it. Then, as the human race multi- 
plied, would the fpirit of competition arife for the difcovery of 
hitherto untafted luxuries or unknown conveniences ; and he who 
firft climbed the lofty palm-tree, and while its leafy honours were 
waving above his head, fcattered the golden fliowcr of plenty 
upon his admiring companions, would deferve and enjoy more real 
glory, than any deftroyer of his fellow creatures ever enjoyed, after 
thpfe very boughs became proftituted to proclaim the triumph of 
defolation and war. 

By degrees mankind became fo nranerous and fo adventurous as 
not only to occupy all that part of the world in which they were 
firft fettled, but alfo to migrate into far diftant countries, where 
ruder fkies and lefs fruitfiil plains taught them new wants, and 
put their ingenuity to greater trials. In fliort, by means and acci- 
dents which moft likely wUl long remain a problem for philofo- 
phers, the human race became in procefs of time difperfed over 
almoft every part of the globe where art and labour could find 
them protection and fubfiftence. Their various acquirements, in 
the courfe of their long, laborious progrefs, muft have been all 
founded on the knowledge and obfervation of nature ; and with 
fo much accuracy have they ftudied this fubjed, fo interefting to 
them all, that even in the moft-advanced ftate of fociety, as well aa 
in the loweft, mankind are perfedly agreed upon the ufes of moft 
of the neceflaries with which nature furniflics them; they have 
all alike learned precifely to-what purpofe each is fit, and all fupply 

the 



Dr. Smith*^ Introdu&ory Bijcourfe. 3 

the ordinary wants of life, all remove its ordinary inconveniences, 
much in the fame way. 

If on the prefent occafion my principal objc6t were to amufe the 
fancy, I ftiould dwell long on this early period of the hiftory of the 
human race. The firft prdbahle wants and inventions of man«- 
kind ; their progrefs from a ftate of nature, peace and innocence, 
to one more turbulent and aftive, but lefs natural and happy; the 
fimple origin of each art- and fcience, and efpecially the fource 
of all human knowledge, in the obfervation of nature, with the 
different degrees of cultivation which each fcience may be fuppofed 
to have received according to the various circumft^iices in which 
mankind have been — all thej^ things might form a very amudng 
£abje& for fpeculation : but as fuch xli£^uifitions mufl be chiefly 
guided by the imagmation, and after all could be only confidered 
in the light of a romance, I mufl: not at prefent enter upon them. 
My review of thofe much later periods, although flill far remote 
from us, in which the progrefs of fcience begin-s to be marked, 
muft be even more flight than the traces of its footflieps in the page 
of hiftory ; and we ftiall eafily confole ourfelvcs for our ignorance 
of what former ages have thought and known, when we find how 
little real advantage is to be derived from the knowledge of thofe 
much nearer^ to us. 

In a very early ftate of fociety the fura of human knowledge 
would become too much for every individual to acquire; of courfe 
fome muft neceffarily purfue. particular arts or enquiries in pre- 
ference to the reft; and this difference is obfervable not only 
among individuals, but alfo between different nations and bodies of 
men. In infant ftates warlike acconipliftiments more than any 
others engage the generality of the citizens^ and, becaufe moft evi- 
•dently neceflfary to the fafety of the whole, are held in the higheft 
efteenu But when external danger is kept at a diftance, the inter- 

B 2 nal 



4 Dr. SmithV ItUroduHory BlfcMrfe. 

nal regulations of the ftate, and the fofter arts of peace, become 
more interefting to thofe who have talents for cultivating them. 
A part of the community being fufficient to fupply the whole with 
the neceffaries of life,, the occupations of the reft becoming voluntary, 
are as various as the virtues and vices, taftes, genius and abili- 
ties of mankind ; and the more a people are refined and enlight- 
ened, the more various and the more diftindly marked are the pur* 
fuits of individuals. 

The early hiftory of fcience informs us rather of peculiar acquire- 
ments by which certain nations diftinguifhed themfelves from the 
reft, than of the general ftock of knowledge then in the world. 
Thus we are told of the (kill of the Egyptians in aftronomy, to 
which they were peculiarly led by their manner of repofing on open 
terraces under a cloudlefs Iky. But we are not to conclude that 
this fcience had never been cultivated by any people before, nor 
that the Egyptians, and all the reft of the world, had lived totally 
void of curiofity, and blind to every thing around them, till their 
attention was excited by the trivial circumftance above mentioned. 
We learn from the Old Teftament, which if it were merely an 
human work would be the mioft venerable monument in the world, 
that Natural Hiftory was very early one of the fciences in the higheft 
eftimation. Without examining what was the precife degree of 
Solomon's Ikill in this fcience, the manner in which his botanical 
knowledge is mentioned in the Bible, proves that to have been in 
thofe days the moft efteemed perhaps of all learning whatever. 
Yet where are the records of its progrefs? How totally is the 
knowledge of thofe ages and of numberlefs others loft to us ! 

As botany and aftronomy have been among the earlieft purfuits of 
mankind, fo they have been prepofteroufly combined together, and 
connexions frequently imagined between certain ftars and parti- 
cular plants. This is one of thofe inftances, but too numerous in 

the 



I 

f 



Dr. Smith*/ IniraduSlory Difcourfe, 5 

the hiftory of the human mind, of theory, like an ignis fatmrs, 
having led men aftray, and made them pay dear for a little real in- 
ftru6tion, by bewildering them in endlefs errors and abfurdities. 
And fo hard is it to overcome prejudices, fandlified in a manner by 
antiquity, that this idea of a connexion between ftars and plants, is 
only juft got rid of in the moft enlightened parts of the world. 

But to confole ourfelves under the contemplation of fuch humili- 
ating inftances of human weaknefs, let us turn our attention to the 
father of philofophy, at leaft of our philofophy, rifing fo fuperiorto 
the darknefs in which he lived, darting his penetrating glance 
through all nature, and efkabliftiing principles which along courfe of 
ages of enquiry have but confirmed. With Ariftotle begins the real 
hiftory of fcience ; and how much foever he may have erred on 
particular points, the greatnefs of his conceptions and the juftnefs 
of his ideas on the whole, entitle him to our high veneration, and 
we fhould corredt his miftakes with awe. His labours in the in* 
veftigation of the animal kingdom have laid the foundation of the 
knowledge we now poffefs, and it cannot fufficiently be regretted 
that we have only an imperfed account of his difcoveries.— Thco- 
phraftus, the worthy difciple of Ariftotle, has given us the fir ft 
fcientific views of the vegetable and mineral kingdoms His works 
are indeed ftiort and imperfect (ketches, but they are by the hand 
of a mafter. Thefe two great men ftand unrivalled as the only 
philofophical naturalifts of antiquity of whom we have any fatif- 
faftory knowledge. 

Several ages afterwards came Pliny, that laborious compiler, 
whofe mind, too much occupied by a variety of purfuits, could pro- 
perly cultivate none. He has tranfmitted to us, as far as he was 
at)le> all that was known of Natural Hiftory, or rather all that had 
been imagined^ at the time in which he lived. Whether Qiofcorides 

lived 



6 Dr. Smith^j JntroduSiory Dlfcourft. 

lived before or after liim, and which borrowed from the other, the 
learned are not agreed^ nor is it of much confeqnence to the re- 
putation of either. Diofcoridcs has had perhaps no great injufticc 
done him by a celebrated modern writer, who ft3rles him ** a great 
compiler of receipts.'* In fa£t his works are nothing elfe than a 
materia medica^ in which he has enumerated all the natural bodies 
known at that time to have been ufed in medicine, with their ima- 
ginary virtues, but with fo little judgment, that it were charitable 
to fuppofe he meant only to colle6l the opinions of others, without 
ever attempting to exercife that facultyi How he came to be 
called the father of botany is wonderful to me. It is lefs extraordi- 
nary that he fhould, after the revival of learning, have had in- 
numerable commentators^ becaufe his ihort and imperfedt defcrip- 
tions would afford ample fcope to thofe who imagined all human 
wifdom to be contained in the dbfcure works of men who had lived 
in the world a few ages before themfelves. 

That age of commentators we muft now confider. I purpofely 
pafs over thofe times of darknefs which followed the ruin of the 
Roman Empire, during which, if there were any (hadow of fcience 
in the world, it was among the Arabians, and they cultivated 
Natural Hiftory only as a branch of medicine. Thofe who wifli 
to ftudy this part of the hiftory of botany, will find ample fatif- 
fa£lion in Haller's Bibliothcca Botanica, where they may alfo fee 
an account of all the Greek and Roman authors who have at all 
touched on this branch of Natural Hiftory; and whom I have 
avoided mentioning, not only that I might keep within the bounds 
I had prefcribed to rayfelf, but becaufe the labours of thofe 
writers do not appear to have coptiibuted to the knowledge we 
now poflefs. 

When learning began to raife its drooping head in the fifteenth 
century, thofe fciences of which moft traces were found in the 

writings 



Dr. Smith'j InifoduBory Difcourfe. y 

writings of the ancients began firft to be cultivated. Botany was 
more efpecially attended to very early, as medicine, which, however 
it might have been degraded in the ages of barbarifm, could never 
have been totally neglected, ftood in immediate need of its affift- 
ance. The works of the ancients, and particularly thofe of 
Diofcoridcs, were then ftudied with the moft pertinacious affiduity ; 
remedies which this writer had recommended were deemed infal- 
lible, and virtues which he^had attributed to any plant, indifpu- 
table. The chief diflSculty in almoft every cafe was to find out the 
plant he meant ; and this difficulty becoming at length fo great as 
to be abfolutely infurmountable, his commentators were loft in 
mazes of their own conje6tures. It was happy for the credit of 
Diofcoridcs that this was the cafe, and that the world were fo oc- 
cupied by this kind of criticifm, as feldom to have examined the 
truth of his affertions. 

Of thefe commentators fome few had great original merit in 
giving figures of the plants of which they treated, and thofe figures 
are many of them executed with fuch perfe6tion as to excite our 
aftonifliment; they have rarely been excelled at any following 
period* The firft of thefe is Brunfelfius, whofe figures, although 
only wooden outlines, often cxprefs the plant intended better than 
many fine modem engravings, and were evidently drawn by a firft- 
rate painter. Matthiolus, the moft celebrated of all the com- 
mentators on Diofcoridcs, has likewife given excellent figures of all 
the natural fubftances mentioned in his book ; thofe of the two 
Venetian editions of this work are ftill the admiration of botanifts, 
and make thofe editions much fought after by coUedors. 

The laige' figures of Fuchfius are no lefs celebrated, nor with 
lefsreafon; although only outlines, they reprefent the plants ex- 
tremely well. 

The example of thefe authors was foon followed by others, who 
4 , publiftied 



B Dk. SmithV IniroduBory Dtfcourfi. 

publiftied figures of plants from their own obfervation; and ever 
fmce the middle of the fixteenth century the prefs tliroughout 
Europe has teemed with fimilar publications ; certainly to the great 
advancement of botany, although the merit of thefe works has 
been very various. 

For almoft two centuries after the revival of letters in Europe 
the attention of naturalifts was chiefly confined to the vegetable 
creation ; and although fincc that time the animal and mineral 
kingdoms have received an eminent degree of cultivation, ftili 
botany has always kept its ground. The infinitely varied beauties 
of the vegetable tribe have, in every country, engaged fome ingenu- 
ous minds in the contemplation of this branch of the great family 
of nature, and excited tjiem to inveftigate the laws by which it is 
governed. Whether their labours have been crowned with the 
fmile of princes, rewarded with worldly honours and emoluments, 
or onlydeftined to enliven the fcenes of rural retirement, to relieve 
the mind amid the bufy purfuits of a<5live life, or add new charms 
to focial intcrcourfe ; they have never failed to carry with them 
their own reward, in that fweet and innocent pleafure which rifes 
under the ^t!^^ of the botanift wherever he goes, in thofe fublime 
and delightful ideas of the Author of nature to which fuch enquiries 
lead, and the complacency they always excite in the mind. 
. The inftitution of public botftnic gardens is a memorable sera 
iiT thehiftory of botany. ' The firft of thefe was, I believe, at Padua 
in 1533 *, where it ftiU continues to make a tolerable figure, al- 
though now furpaffed by feveral others, which have had more 
powerful proteftors. The gardens of Florence, Pifa, Bologna and 
Ley den were foon after eftablifhed, And all ftill exift. J^Jot mufll 

* The eftabUfliment of a Utanic garden at Rome about the year 1450 ieems not fiifv» 
ficicntly authenticated. See Sabbati Hortus Romanus. 

iorget 



Dr. Smith^x IntroduSory Difcourfe. 9 

forget to mentiop that wc had at London a tolerable colle6tion of 
plants in the garden of Gerard, a catalogue of which, printed in 
1596, exifts in the Britifh Mufeum, but is elfewhere rarely to be met 
with. The fuccefs of botanic gardens has pretty much kept pace 
with the commerce of the countries in which they were eftablifhed ; 
nor is this to be wondered at* The intercourfe of the Dutch with 
the Eait Indies, and their poffeflion of the Gape, long gave their 
collefiions, in alLthe different branches of Natural Hiftory, a decided 
fuperiority over thofe of other nations. The Englifh have now 
enriched their gardens far beyond any others by the fupplies ob- 
tained from the Eaft and Weft Indies, and efpecially from America. 

I find myfelf obliged to pafs over a number of naturalifts who 
flouriflied from the middle to the end of the fixteenth century. 
Thofe whofe works are the moft known, and have been of the moft 
fervice to the world, are Tragus, Leonardus, B^uchfius, Dodonaeus 
and Dalechampius in Botany, Bellenius in Ornithology, and Ronde* 
letius in Ichthyology. But there are a few great name? which 
ought not to be fo flightly mentioned ; I muft be allowed to enlarge 
a little on the merits of Gefner, Aldrovandus, Glufius and Gasfal- 
pin.us. 

Conrad Gefner, the greateft naturalift the world had feen fince 
Ariftotle, was bora at Zurich in 15 16, and died of the plague in 
1565. Notwithftanding his conftitution was feeble and fickly, and 
his life by no means a long one, he applied himfelf to the ftudy of 
nature with fuch afliduity, that he not only made more new obfer- 
vations than had been made by any modern writer, but alfo firft 
reftored the fciencie he cultivated to the dignity of philofophy, of 
which it had almoft loft fight fince the days of Ariftotle and Theo- 
phraftus. Gefner cultivated medicine with equal fuccefs, proceed- 
ing always on the fure ground of obfervatioii and experience. His 
health, naturally weak, is faid to .have frequently fuffered by the 

C experi- 



• 



• 



9 



10 Dr. Smith'j IntroduSory Difcourfi. 

experiments he made on himfelf. But his infirmities did not deter 
him from taking frequent and laborious alpine journeys^ any more 
than his very confined circiimftances prevented his being at con* 
iiderablei and at that time very uncommon^ expences^ in the ad^ 
vancement of his darling purfuits. He founded and fupported a 
botanic garden, kept a painter and engraver in his fervice, had a 
very confiderable library, and, according to Haller, was the firft wha 
ever formed a mufeum of Natural Hiftory. But his greatefl 
honour is his having firft fuggefted the idea of a methodical ar- 
rangement of plants according to claffes, orders and genera^ from 
the different ftrufture of the flowers ; an idea which all true bota- 
nifts fince his time have purfued, and to which the very exiftence of 
botany as a fcience is owing. 

Aldrovandus refembled Gefner in his indefatigable induftry and 
zeal for the advancement of Natural Hiftory. Like him he de- 
voted his life to travelling and ftudy, and like him eftablifhed a 
mufeum and undertook works whofe immenfity aftonifhes as much 
as their erudition. But he did not pofTefs the fyftematic genius of 
Gefner, nor had he the prudence along with the liberality of his 
great contemporary. Although he had a fortune of his own, and 
was affifled by many of the rich and powerful of his time, he was 
reduced to indigence towards the end of life. He lived to the age 
of 80, dying in 1605. His memory has been always much honoured 
at Bologna. The great zoological work which he left imperfeift, was^ 
finiflied after his death, and his mufeum laid the foundation of that 
which at prefent is one of the ornaments of that univerfity. Many 
fpecimens ftill exift there marked with the venerable hand-writing 
of their firft pofTefTor. 

Neither had Clufius that genius for arrangement for which 
Gefner was remarkable. Botany is however very much indebted to 
him for the publication of a vaft number of new plants, with cxceU 

lent 



Dr. SmithV IntroduBory Dtfcourfe. if 

lent figures which atone for the imperfe6Hons of his defcriptions. 
His amiable difpofition, fays Haller, procured him a great number of 
friendS) whofe difcoveries enriched his own works. He always ac- 
knowledged their favours, and gave to every body their due praife. 
A number of the plants difcovered by Gefner were firft publifhed by 
Clufius. This illuftrious botanift died in 1609, at the great age of 
84. He was profeflbr of botany at Lcyden, where a palm tree (a 
caulefcent variety of Chamserops humilis) planted by him, ftill ex- 
ifts in great perfedion. 

I am now to fpeak of Caefalpinus ; but if I Ihould enter into a 
full difcuffion of his character and merits, it would lead me a great 
deal too far. His ardent attachment to Ariftotle led him into the 
depths of metaphyfics, and into many errors relating to the nature 
of man, and thfe firft caufe of all things, which the dogmas of the. 
court of Rome where he lived were not likely to corre6t, in a phi- 
lofophical mind like his. He has left evident proofs of his knowing 
the circulation of the blood at leaft through the lungs, and the fer- 
vices he has rendered to botany entitle him to be ranked among 
its moft able promoters. I need not enter into the particulars of 
his method, which is chiefly founded on the fruit. He has made 
fome miftakes, which Haller has taken care to point out ; but it 
muft not be forgotten that Caefalpinus has thrown more light on 
the ftru6hire and affinities of vegetables than any one before his 
time, and has diftin<ftly mentioned the fexes of plants. He died 
in 1603. 

While thefe great men were flourifhing on the continent, botany 
began to be attended to in our own country. Turner publifhed his 
Herbal in 1551 ; foon after Lyte gave a tranflation of Dodonaeus ; 
and in 1597 was printed the firft edition of Gerard's Herbal. It is 
fufficient that I mention the names of thefe authors. Lobel, who 
began to publifh in London in 1570, and who is the author of many 

C 2 good 



1% Dr» SM][TH'i IkiroJuffory Dj/cour/e. 

good obfervations^ has been often miflaken for an Englifhman ^ 
but -although he fpent the greater part of his life here, he was bom 
in Flanders, 

It would be unpardonable if I were to finifti this period of the 
hiftory of our fcience without mentioning Fabius Columna, who 
firft gave copper plates of plants ; and thofe of an almoft unrivalled 
degree of accuracy, drawn and engraved by his own hand. In his 
Phytobafanos, publifhed at Naples in 1592, and again at Florence in 
1744, he has taken infinite pains, and (hown great fagacity, in deter- 
mining fome plants of the ancients, and has dete£ked innumerable 
errors in Pliny and other authors. His Ecphrafis publiihed feveral 
years afterwards is a larger work, and contains a large number of 
new plants, diftinguifhed and figured with the greateft accuracy. 
He is likewife the author of a curious and learned work on the 
Purpura of the ancients. All th.efe bodes, efpecially the firft, are 
very rare. Columna, an able critic himfelf, was criticifed in his 
turn by one far inferior, Aldinus in his Hortus Famefianus, printed 
at Rome 1625 ; a work in which however there are fome good 
figures of rare plants, and which is not commonly to be met with. 

The inftitution of the academy of the JLyncxi at Rome in 1603 
dcferves to be remarked, as that fociety was the firft of the kind, 
and has been in fome meafure the model of all the prefent literary 
focieties in Europe. Its chief promoter and perpetual prefident was 
Frederick Caefius, a young Roman nobleman of great fcience. 
Among the names of thofe who compofed it we find Fabius Co- 
lumna and the great Galileo, a circumftance perhaps more likely to 
immortalize its memory than the medals which were ftruck upon 
its eftabliftunent. This inftitution died with its noble founder in 
163Q. 

The number of authors who had written on plants without any 
fyftem or method in the fixteenth centuiy^, and the confuflon of 

names 



Dr. Smith'j Introduawy Difamrfe. 13 

names which had been iutrodncedy Teemed to render it at length 
neceiTary for the prefenration of the fcience that fome great fyfte- 
matic genius (hoidd undertake to digeft the confiifed mafs, and pro- 
fiting of the hints of Gefner and GaefalpinuS) reduce into order 
the vaft materials^ with which botany was in a manner over- 
whelmed) rather than enriched. But this events fo much to be 
defined^ was not yet to take place in its full extent. An eminent 
{ervice was however rendered to botany by the two illuftrious 
brothers John and Cafpar Bauhin, with whom I fhall clofe the hif- 
tory of the fixteenth century^ and enter on that of the feventeenth* 
John Bauhin was in a great meafure formed as a botanift under 
Geiher^ but not having a turn for fyftem, he did not in that refpe^ 
leara much from his great teacher. He devoted a life of more than 
70 years to a critical inveftigation of all that had been written be- 
fore him, and made many valuable obfervations as well as many 
original difcoveries. But he opened no hew path in botany. His 
labours were conducted on the fame plan as thofe of his predecefTors. 
The fruit of his (hidies is nothing lefs than an Univerfal Hiflory 
of Plants^ which being left in MS» at his death in 1613, was not 
publiflied till 1650, when it appealed in three volumes folio. Like 
all pofthumous works it has defeds^ which probably it would not 
have had if publiOied by its author. It is a monument of labour 
and erudition, and contains fo much information and fo many eluci- 
dations of preceding authors, as to be ftill in great eflimation, not- 

withftanding its want of order and the rudcnefs of the figures. 

This work paved the way for Cafpar Bauhin in the much mOTe 
important and original one which he imdertook and happily per- 
fe£t^> the publication of which forms one of the moft remarkable 
seras in botany^ and which was firft printed in 1623^ under the 
title of Pinax Theatri Botanid. This was meant^ as its name im- 
ports^ as an index to all the botanical knowledge then in the world, 

2 and 



14 Dr. Smith V IntroduSlory Difcourfe. 

and its author exultingly ftyles it the labour of 40 years. In this 
work about 6000 plants are arranged in twelve books, with fome 
flight traces of fyftem, and each plant is diftinguiflied by a kind of 
defcriptive name, under which are placed the names given it by 
every preceding author. Ray has very jnftly remarked, that befides 
errors and repetitions incident tothe.hiofl: wary in fo Vaft an under- 
taking, Bauhin*s Pinax contains fome hundreds of plants thet^ 
mentioned as fpecies, which have fince been found to be only varie- 
ties J and if this was true in the time of Ray, it is much more fo at 
prefentt Notwithftanding fuch imperfections, this work has been 
found fo ufeful, and indeed fo neceflary, that it continued the gene- 
ral di£tionary of botanifts, till fuperfeded by the publications of 
Tournefort and Linnaeus, and is even now the only fefource of thbfe 
who wifli to ftudy the authors whofe works are prior to it. But this 
is not all which the a£tive mind of Cafper Bauhin undertook. He 
publifhed an excellent edition of Matthiolus with many additions ; 
and has illuftrated about 600 new or heretofore miftaken plants in 
his Prodromus, publiflied firft in 1620, and afterwards with an im- 
proved edition of his Pinax, in 167 1, which is that moft in ufe. 
He likewife meditated a complete hiftory of all the plants men- 
tioned in his Pinax, and finifhed, as it is faid, three books, of which 
the firft only was publilhed by his fon in 1658, with figures. It 
<x>ntains graffes and fome liliaceous plants. Befides all thefe bota- 
nical labours, Cafpar Bauhin pra6lifed medicine with great fuccefs,' 
aad was fo eminently (killed in anatomy as to have been ftyled in' 
his time the prince of anatomifts. He died in 1624, aged 64, being 
about 20 years younger than his brother. I have feen a great part 
of his herbarium at Bafil, in the hands of Mr. De la Chenal, pro- 
feffor of botany there. This herbarium is ineftimable on account^ 
of the difficulty of determining many of Bauhin's plants by his* 
defcriptions alone, and its worthy pofleflbr devotes it to the pur-^ 

pofes 



Dk. SmithV htroduBory Difcourfe. x^ 

pofes of public utili^^ to which indeed all treafures of fcience ought 
to be devoted. 

We muft now make a paufe in the hiitory of botany. Notwith-<^ 
(landing the labours of the Bauhim feemed to promife new vigour 
to this lovely fcience, it languiflied for nearly half a century after 
the time in which they lived. Not that there were no botanical 
writers, nor any colle6tors of plants in all that period, for there 
were a confiderable number of both, as well a& feveral writers on the 
materia medica. Hernandez was fent to South America by Philip IL 
at a yaft expence, but the fruit of his labours is one of the worft 
books in botany. The Italians puzzled themfelves and their readers 
about opobalfamum and the ingredients of the mithridate; and a. 
number of inferior writers appeared in different parts of Europe^ 
efpecially in Germany,, whofe names and merits I might be excufed 
mentioning, even if on this occaQon I had much more time allowed 
me. ' 

I muft only except Jungius, who in his Doxofeopiae Phyficse 
Minores has given great proofs of botanical fagacity, and has thrown 
out fome hints, of which fcdlowing botanifts,. atid among them 
Linnaeus himfelf^ has profitiedwith great advantage; Jungius died 
in 1657. 

Our countryman Parkinfon was alfo an author of great origi-r 
nality and obfervation, much fuperior in this refpeft to Gerard, or 
his commeDtator Johnfon,. although bis figures are inferior to theirs^ 

I fhall profit of this interval to review the progrefs of zoology fiorth 
the middle of the fixteenth to the end of the feventeenth century. 

It is remarkable that a part of natural hiftory, fo evidently the 
moft important and the moft interefting to man, who is himfclf at 
the head of the animal creation, fhould have lain fo long unculti- 
vated* From the time of Ariftotle to Gefner and Aldrovandus,, 
httle or no improvements were made in the knowledge of animals, 
nor with refpeA to claffification was any alteration attempted till 
the time of Ray. The Ariftotelian divifion of animals into vivi- 
parous/ 



l6 Dk. SmithV JntroAiShry Difcourje. 

parous and oviparous is well known^ In the former clafs were ar^ 
ranged all quadrupeds, and in the latter birds, fiflies and infeds. 
Ariftotle was himfelf fenfible that this fyftem muft be taken with 
fome latitude, there being feveral quadrupeds, as lizards^ which 
are not viviparous^ and fome infe6is and fiflies viviparous, although 
not quadrupeds. By infers he and all other naturalifts down to 
Linnaeus underftood fuch of the fmaller kinds of animals as have 
the body divided intb fegments^ fo that many worms and even fiflies 
were included in this divifion. 

Gefner arranged his voluminous hiftory of animals upoii the 
principles of Ariflotle, feparating the oviparous from the viviparous 
quadrupeds ; and Aldrovandus collected all that others had written^ 
indeed without fufficient difcrimination of truth from fi6lion, and 
difpofed it much in the fame order. With refped to Omithology, 
Gefner cultivated that fcience with peculiar fuccefs, and is the au- 
thor of many very valuable obfervations. Aldrovandus copied him 
in many things^ and Johnflon is hardly worth mentionmg, as he 
has done little elfe than copy both. Befides what the authors 
above mentioned have given us relating to fiflies, that branch of 
natural hiflpry was ably handled by Paul Jovius, an Italian phyfician 
of greattafte and learning in the beginning of the (ixteenth century; 
afterwards by the accurate Bellonius, who wrote alfo on birds ; by 
Salvianus in his fuperb book on aquatic animals, printed at Rome in 
1554; *^^ ^y Rondeletius, profeflTor at Montpelier, who publiflied 
the fame year. Infe£ts were alfo particularly treated of in a work the 
joint labour of feveral able men, among whom was the indefatigable 
Gefner; this book was publiflied by Dr. MoufFet, an Englifh phy- 
fician, in 1634. 

This Wafl the ftate of Zoology when our own immortal Harvey 
firft dared to controvert one of the doctrines of Ariftotle, which, 
although really unworthy of fo great a philofopher, nobody had 

hitherto 



Dr. Smith V IntroduBory Dijcourfe. 17 

hitherto oppofed, I mean that of equivocal generation. The meta« 
phyfical quibbles which had fo long difgraced the fchools, began 
now to give way to a fpirit of enquiry and obfervation ; but not in 
the fchools themfelvcs, for from thence light feldom fprings. The 
propofition of Harvey, ^* omnia ex ovo^ was not received without op- 
pofition ; but this was forgotten in the much more furious oppo- 
fition given to his other more important and interefling dodtrine^ 
of the circulation of the blood. No fooner was this publiftied 
than a crowd of adverfaries befet him. After in vain endeavouring 
to refute his opinion, they had recourfe to the common fubterfiige 
of denying its originality ; taking upon themfelves the greater re- 
proach, of having been blind to th« evidences already exifting of fo 
indifputable a truth, rather than allow their illuftrious cotemporary 
any merit in the difcovery. 

With Harvey begins what may be called the phyfiological period 
of Natural Hiftory. His hypothefis of generation was confirmed 
by the experiments of Redi and Malpighi, two very philofophical 
naturalifts, who have difencumbered fcience from many prejudices, 
and thrown much light on fome of the moft abftrufe parts of phy- 
fiology. The experiments of Redi to difprove equivocal genera- 
tion, are truly admirable, and Malpighi's inveftigations, relating to 
the anatomy and transformation of filkworms, and the devdope- 
ment of the chick in the egg, are too celebrated to need any frefli 
eulogium. About the middle of the feventeenth century a new 
and very interefting propofition in phyfiology was darted, that of 
the fexes of plants, the honour of which is given to our country- 
man Sir Thomas Millington^ It is to .be wiftied however that he 
had written fomething himfelf upon the fubjedt, or that we knew 
whether the idea were really originally his own. Nearly about 
the fame time the difcovery of the lymphatic veffels in animals was 
made, either by Rudbeck or Thomas Bartholin, or rather by both 

D at 



iB Dr. SmithV IntroiuSlory Difcourfe. 

at once. All which I think juftifies me in calling the period of 
which I am fpeaking, a phyfiological age* In it was laid the foun- 
dation of almoft every *do6trine which has fince been cultivated 
and enlarged upon^ and on which all following medical and phyfi- 
, ological fyftems have been built. 

It is no wonder that fyftematic Zoology fhould derive advantage 

from all thefe difcoveries. Tdwards the end of the laft, century 

appeared two great naturalifts^ amply qualified to profit by them, 

and to whom the fcience is infinitely indebted, our countrymen 

Willoughby and Ray. Thefe illuftrious friends laboured together 

with uncommon ardour in the ftudy of nature, and left fcarcely 

any of her tribes unexplored. But death, which fo often difap* 

points the faireft hopes, cut off the former in the prime of life, 

before he had digefted the materials to the acquifition of which he 

had devoted his youth ; and they might all have been loft to the 

world and his name have perifhed with them^ but for the faithful 

friendfhip and truly fcientific ardour of Ray. So clofe was the in- 

tcrcourfe between thefe two naturalifls, that it is not eafy to affign 

each his due fhare of merit. Indeed Ray has been fo partial to the 

fame of his departed friend, and has cherifhed his memory with 

fuch afFedionate care, that we are in danger of attributing too 

much to Mr. Willoughbyi and too little to himfelf. Certainly 

however it is by no means a fair flatement of the cafe to fay with 

Dr. Derham, that Mr. Willoughby had taken the animal kingdom 

for his tafk, as Mr. Ray had the vegetable one. The Ornithology 

and Ichthyology fufficiently fhew that Ray was not a mere editor of 

thofe noble works, and the Synopfes Avium & Pifcium, publifhed 

lome time after, in which he has made many improvements^ and 

fome important changes as to arrangement, prove with how much 

attention he had fludied thofe two branches of Zoology. I need 

not add that the Synopfis of Quadrupeds is> as to method^ entirely 

2 his 



Dr. Smithes IntroduSt^y Dlfcourfe. 19 

his own> although Willoughby is there often quoted for many ex- 
cellent obfervations ; and the fame may be faid of the Hiftoria Infec* 
t9rum9 publilhed in 171O9 after the death of Ray. Ail thefe works 
are excellent in their kind, admirably methodized, and exhibit fuch 
proofs of accurate obfervation, fuch a candid love of truths and fuch 
penetration in difcovering it, as muft ever rank their authors among 
the firfl and moit philofophical naturalifts. 

Ray, being diffatisfied with Ariftotle's claflification of animals, 
was the inventor of a new one, founded on the ftrudture of the 
heart. The Harveian experiments and do6):rine of the circulation 
had called the peculiar attention of philofophers to every organ 
which has a (hare in that phaenomenon, and to this caufe probably 
we owe the method of Ray, Taking therefore the divifion of ani- 
mals into Sanguinea and Exanguia, which was a very ancient one, 
he fubdivides the firft clafs into fuch as are fumifhed with lungs 
and fuch as breathe by gills ; and the former of thefe he again 
feparates into thofe which have an heart with two ventricles, and 
thofe whofe heart has only a fmgle ventricle. The latter divifion 
contains Reptiles, the former viviparous Quadrupeds, Whales and 
Birds. The Animalia branchiis refpirantia include all Fifhes pn>* 
perly fo called, the Whale kind and all the Exanguia being of 
courfe excluded. The Animalia Exanguia are divided into ^eater 
and lefTer. The latter divifion contains Infects ; the former is again 
fubdivided into three genera, the firft of which includes the Mollia, 
or MoUufca^ as Guttle-fifh and Polypi ; the fecond Gruftacea, as 
Crabs and Lobflers, which are properly Infe£ts ; and the third Tef- 
tacea, or fhelUfifh. This fyflem, although liable to a great many 
objections, which I fhall not now ftay to enumerate, is deferving iti 
many refpe6ts of great praife : its author has fhewn great fkill in 
the characters by which he has chofen to difcriminate the fubordi- 
nate divifionsy and in ihort the Linnsean fyftem of Quadrupeds i^ 

D 2 little 



^ I 



20 Dr. SmithV IntroduSlory Difcourfe. 

little more than a reformation of that of Ray. I (hall foon fpeak 
of the botanical merit of this great man ; but before we take leave of 
this period of Zoology, it may be expefted I fhould fay fomething 
of Leeuwenhoek, and his theory of generation, which has made fo 
much noife; nor may it be ufelefs to mention him, if only as a 
memento to future theorifts. What a pity it is, that fo excellent an 
obfei-ver, to whom the world is indebted for fo much folid phyfio- 
logical information, fhould have produced an hypothefis, whofe 
celebrity feems but to have haftened its refutation, and configned it 
to more abfolute negleft ! The fpermatic worms of Leeuwenhoek 
may perhaps be the jeft of philofophers many ages to come, while 
others (hall profit of his genuine difcoveries, without knowing to 
whom they are obliged. 

Let us now take a general view of the ftate of Natural Hiftory at 
the end of the laft century. 

In England the flattering afpedl which this fcience had worn 
under the aufpices of Charles L was blafted by the turbulent times 
which followed ; but in the peaceful days of Charles IL natural 
hiftory, as well as all the different branches of philofophy, received 
a degree of cultivation and advancement hitherto unknown in this 
country ; and this led on to the golden age of fcience in England, 
which was crowned by the poffeflion of a Newton. 

The Royal Society, which, from a fmall beginning at Oxford 
about the year 1645, made rapid advances when removed to the 
metropolis, was eftablilhed under the protection of the king in 1662, 
very foon after his reftoration. This learned body beftowed great 
attention from the beginning, as they have ever fince done, upon 
the phyfiological part of natural hiftory. The names of Boyle, 
Evelyn, Hook and Needham, are among the firft members of this 
fociety ; and how much they have laboured in the advancement of 
natural fcience is well known. Mr* WiUoughby was one of the 

original 



Dr. SmithV IntroiuBGry Dijcourfe. 21 

ordinal fellows of the Royal Society^ although his fiiend Ray was 
not admitted till the year i6&j. Dr. Lifter, the great conchologift^ 
was very early afibciated with it, as well as that admirable vegetable 
phyfiologift Dr* Grew* 

Nor was France behind-hand with England in' attention to the 
fciencesy and among the reft natural hiftory* Henry IV,. that 
great name which fcience delights in joining with humanity ta 
blefs, had endeavoured long ago to promote hterature and ufeful 
knowledge throughout his dcsninions* Among other inftitutions 
the botanic gardens of Paris and Montpellier are owing to his mu^ 
nificence« But his untimely death, and the fubfequent diftur-^ 
bances» for a while put a ftop to all farther cultivation of the 
arts of peace^ About twenty years afterwards,. by the indefatigable 
perfeverance of De la Brofle, fupenntendant of the Paris garden^ the 
Cardinal de Richlieu was induced to grant it his prote6tion; but 
this garden firft rofe to any confiderable degree of eminence towards 
the end of the laft century under Louis XIV* This munificent 
prince encouraged learning with that fplendid liberality which dif- 
tinguiflied all his actions. For the purpofe of promoting botany, 
and enriching the royal garden, the illuftrious Tournefort was fent 
to the Levant, and the accurate and indefatigable Plumier made 
I three voyages to America, and died as he was about undertaking a 

^ fourth. An Academy of Sciences was inftituted at Paris in i666>. 

and another fome years after at Montpellier, very fimilar to the 
Royal Society of London, with which the greateft men in Europe, 
have always been proud to be afibciated.. 

Many fimilar inftitutions were fet on foot throughout Europe,i 
as the Imperial Academy Naturae Curioforgm, begun in 1652. A 
number of botanic gardens were alfo eftab^iftied in Germany ; but 
Linnaeus has truly obferved that they haVe never been rich in 
exotic plants,, on account of the fmall intercourfe of that country 

with 



2z Dr. SmithV Jntniu&wy Difcourji. 

with the Indies ; whereas the gardens of Holland were ^t this tune 
overflowing with riches from the mod diftant parts of the globe* 

The Amfterdam garden under the care of the Gommeiins was 
now one of the firfl in Europe^ and that of Lejrden was rendered 
celebrated by the catalc^ue pubiifhed by Herman* Hdknd had 
moreover the glory of producing at diis time that moll furaptuous 
and excellent woiic, the Hortus Malabaricos ; by which a new world 
was in a manner laid open to the botanifts of Europe, and from 
which they learned with furprife, that the knowledge of plants had 
made almoft as much progrefs in the remote regions of Afia^ as in 
their own part of the world. 

But the ftudy of nature was no where making fuch an tinilbrmly 
ileady progrefs as in Sweden. At Upfal, tinder the aufpices of the 
great Rudbecki was laid the foundation of what Mr. Sdllingfleet 
has juftly called an unrivalled fchool of natural hiftoiy, and which 
was dedined afterwards to give laws to the reft of the world. Rarely 
lias fuch a variety of profoimd and extenfive learning been united 
as in Rudbeck. I have already mentioned his anatomical merit in 
difcovering the l3rmphatics. In antiquities, especially thofe of the 
northern nationsi and in the learned languages^ his knowledge was 
unbounded. In botany he had erected to himfelf what might 
reafonably have been thought a ^mOTiumentunLaerepcrcnnius,'* 
in one of the greateft undertakings of the kind^ a colle^on of fine 
wooden cuts of all the plants then known. They were to have 
been arranged and named according to Bauhin^s Pinax, in 12 largte 
volumes folio. But two volumes Were fcarcely printed, when in 
1702 a dreadful fire reduced almoft all Upfal to aflies, and with it 
the work of Rudbeck, and many thoufand wooden blocks already 
cut, befides almoft all the materials of an hiftdry of Lapland com- 
pofed by his fon, who indeed had a principal hand in the great 
work of which I am fpeaking. It can fcarcely be thought an im- 
peachment 



Dr. SlflTB'i IntroduBoty Bijewrfi. 23 

peachment of the venerable old man's philofophy, that fo crael a 
difappointment foon brought him with forrow to the grave. 

All that remains of this work are a few copies of the fecond 
volume^ and three only of the firft, one of which is in the Sherar-* 
dian libraiy at Oxford. Linnsus was poffefied of about 120 of the 
wooden blocks of this firft volume^ as well as 8 or 10 unpublifhed 
blocks belonging to fome intended one; all which came with his 
CoUeAion into my hands : they are for the molt part admirable 
figures of grafles*. 

Having been now infenfibly led back to Botany^ I fhall take a 
eompreheniive view of the fyftematic atra dF that fcience^ when fo 
many new methods of clafliiication ^ere invented, moft of which 
were (trenuoufly fupported by their refpeftive authors^ who little 
thought that in the {pace of half a centuryi oblivion would nearly 
level all diftiuAions between them. 

The firft who revived the idea of a claflical arrangement of 
plants, (ince the tiipe of Csefalpinus, was Morifon, who has beea 
juftly cenfured for neglefiing to acknowledge how much he owed 
to his ingenious predecelTor, and who has in his turn received (imi-* 
lar treatment from his followers. His method was founded chiefly 
on the fruit, to which, as well as the external habits of plants, he 
paid too much regard, and too little to the other parts of fruc^ 
tification. The only work clafTed according to the method of 
Morifon is his own Hiftoria Univerfalis Plantarum, an ufeful 
compilation, which is daily ufed as a book of reference, by thofe 
who never think of his fyftem. 

But the three priiicipal fyftematic authors were Ray, Tournefort 
and Rivinus, between whom was much warm controverfy on the 
fut^effc ; and it muft have been an interefting matter indeed that 

• Publiihed under the titis of Reliqiii«B Rttdb^Jdame^ folio, 1789. 

could 



^4 Dr. Smith*/ IntroduSory Dlfcourfe. 

could fo agitate the candid peaceable fpirits of Ray and Tournefoit. 
Of Ray it may be faid that his method was the moft abftrufc aiid 
fcientific, while that of Rivinns was at firft fight haore fimple, but 
liable to as great difficulties in the execution. The former was prin- 
cipally founded on the fruit, the latter on the corolla, and in both, 
were the other parts of fru6liiication too much negle£ted. . The 
fyftem of Tournefort, which was likewife formed chiefly upon the 
corolla, was undoubtedly far fuperior to all the reft then extant; 
yet I doubt whether that alone would have procured its author his 
extenfive reputation, had he not inveftigated and difcriminated the 
genera of plants in fo mafterly a manner, that this alone is fufficient 
to rank him above all preceding botanifts. It is true he did not 
invent a mode of fyftematically defining thefe genera by words ; this 
was referved for Linnseus: but it has been well obferved by 
Monfieur Delamarck, that Tournefort was no lefs fenfible of the 
diftinftions of his genera, and he has caufed them to be figured in 
fo able a manner that they cannot be miftaken. 

Thi« great botanift, chiefly unfortunate in having had fome in- 
judicious advocates, is the glory of the French nation. His country- 
men are with reafon proud of him, and his merits as a botanift and 
a traveller are fo well known, that no commendation of mine can 
add to his fame. Yet I muft not omit to do juftice to his fucccflbr 
Vaillant, whofe merit I think is hardly fufficiently known. In 
profiting of the indulgence granted me when at Paris of confulting 
the Herbariums of thefe two eminent botanifts, I was aftonifhed at 
the inftances of profound knowledge and acutenefs of judgment 
which I met with in that of Vaillant, both with refpeft to the 
genera, fpecies, and fynonyma of plants ; whereas it is well known 
that Tournefort was lefs folicitous about the fcientific diftinftions 
of fpecies. Vaillant is alfo one of the firft who was well acquainted 
with the fexes of plants. His academical oration on that fubjeft 
is full of good obfervations, though not without fome errors. In 

this 



D». SmithV bUrcduSiory Di/courfe. z^ 

this work he laughs without referve at Leeuwenhock's peculiar 
theory of generation^ and fpeaks rather too difrefpedlfully of 
Tournefort ; for this he has never been forgiven. 

There were at this time feveral botanical fyftems invented befides 
thofe above mentioned ; but few being remarkable for originality or 
ufe^ I cannot dwell long upon them. Herman's was one of the 
bcft. It was entirely founded on the fruit, and not very different 
from thofe of Ray and Morifon. Boerhaave*s had great merits in 
being founded mwe or lefs on all the parts of fructification. The 
mediod of Chriftopher Knaut is an alteration of that of Ray^ 
without any improvement. The paradoxical Chriftian Knapt, 
who thought the efTence of a flower confifled in its corolla^ was 
never very famou$> and would now probably make no profelytes 
at all. 

A iingular fyftem was invented by ProfefTor Magnol of Montpel- 
lier, founded on the calyx, to which Linnaeus was very partial^ and 
he even formed a fimilar method of clafTification himfelf : happily, 
kowever, this was not the only one he ever invented. 

Nor was this «ra of botany merely a fyflematic one. Linqseus 
has not fcrupled to affert, that within the fpace of 20 years, at the 
end of the lafl century, twice as many plants were difcovered as 
had been made known by the joint labours of all preceding botanifls. 
Befides thofe which were colle6ted by Tournefort, Plumier and 
Ray, a noble coUeftion was brought from Jamaica by Dn Sloane, 
afterwards Sir Hans, of which the hiftory in two volumes folio is well 
known. Mr. Sherard conful at Smyma, who cultivated botany 
with princely munificence and with the ardour and difcemment of 
a true philofopher, has been the means of making known a very 
great number of plants. His vaft herbarium and hbrary are now 
among the literary treafures of Oxford. The indefatigable Plukenet 
procured and publifhed an immenfe number from all parts of the 

E world, 



a6 Dr. Smith'^ Introductory Dijcourji. 

world, many of them. very rare. His book is in every body's hands^ 
and it would be fuperfluous here to fay any thing of its utility^ 
Petiver was no lefs perfevering in making coUedions, not only of 
plants, but of all kinds of natural objefts. His works are of a very 
peculiar chara^fler, and exhibit more zeal than genius or ac- 
curacy. His rough criticifms of his contemporary Plukcnct h^ve 
hurt nobody but their author. The acquiiitions of Dn Herman in 
Ceylon were very confiderable. They lay a while dormant^ only to 
appear with greater celebrity from the pen of Linnaeus* In fo bril- 
liant a period of the hiftory of this fcience I am obliged to pad 
over many lefs illuftrious, although great names ; and ihall only 
mention Rumphius, whofe ardour was not to be damped even by 
the great^ft misfortune which can befal a naturalift, the lofs of 
fight. The rich treafures of Amboina were made known to us by 
this laborious man. His book on {hells is in high eflimation ; and 
his Herbarium Amboinenfe might vie with the Hortus Malabaricus^ 
if all concerned in the publication of it had performed their parts 
as well as he has done his : but the figures are by no means com** 
parable to thofe of that ftupendous work. The courage of Rum- 
phius in purfuing natural hiftory after he had loft his fight, re- 
minds me of a i^ilar inftance, I believe very little known, of a 
Proven9al phyfician named RebouU who undertook a manufcript 
hiftory of plants in feveral large folio volumes^ and, becoming blind, 
actually completed many of the unfiniihed chapters with his own 
hand after that accident. This curious manufcript was ftiewn 
me in the publick library at Parma. 

While Botany was making this great progrefs, Entomology began 
to be cultivated with an afiiduity, which was amply repaid by the 
curious and aftonilhing faiSls it brought to light. The notion of 
equivocal generation having been refuted by Harvey, Redi and Mal- 
pighi, the propagation and metamorphofes of infe6ts became an 
2 interefting 



Dr. Smith'j Introiu&ixry Di/Mirfc. 27 

mterdting object of enquiry with feveral able men, among the 
firft of whom were Goedart and Swammerdam« The difcovenes 
of.Goedart were received with laudable caution by his contemporary 
ries, efpecially what relates to the hiftory of Ichneumones ; but 
following obleivers have confirmed the accuracy of his relations* 
The works of Swammerdam are full of curious information, and 
will fuffickntly reward thofe whoife patience is not to be exhaufted 
by his tedious heavy ftyle. Nor mud I foi^et Madam Merian, 
whofe eKellent work on the Surinam Infedts, one of the mod 
fplendid in natiu^aL hiftory, is. a monument of female perfeverance 
and enthuiia6h. u 

Other admirers of nature have turned their attention to fhells 
and marine produftions ; and the fecility with which thefe bodies 
are preferved in cabinets, has. made the collecting them very 
generaL A few authors had written on fhells about the beginning 
6f the laft century, as Aldrovandu^, Golumna, Imperati, &c. .but 
about the end of the century two veiy eminent writers were par- 
ticularly diftinguiihed in Conchology, Bonanni and Lifter. Their 
works are in daily ule. In the different publications of the latter 
are many curious anatomical obiervationsy and Bonanni has treated 
the formation of fhells in a very philofophical mannen Some in* 
terefting hints on the fame fubjedl are to be found in Steno^s " De 
Solido intra Solidum Diflertationi^ Prodromus,*' printed at Florence 
in 1669* 

Of all the parts of Natural Hiftory, Mineralogy for a long time 
made the floweft progrefs. From the time of Theophraftus to the 
end of the feventeenth century few improvements were made in 
the knowledge of Foflils. What little was written in all that 
time contained only repetitions of old erroneous fuperftitions 
opinions. Even at the period of which I am fpeaking, a 
ftriking idea of the darknefs of this fcience may be formed, from 

E 2 Tourne- 



28 Dr. SmithV IntroduSlory Di/courfe^ 

Toumefort's having maintained the vegetation of ftones, .a&d 
Lifter's having pofitively aflerted that all extraneous foffils, as petri- 
fied fhells, &c« are only li^us naturae, and never were the real (hells 
they reprefenL Afterwards Mineralogy was cultivated with a little 
more care, but ftill on wrong principles, the external figure of 
fofiils being principally attended to^ and not their component 
parts ; nor was it till very lately that the fcience was eftabliflied on 
its true foundation^ that of chemical analyfis. 

For about fi?fteen years after the beginning of the prefent century 
nothing very confiderable was printf(l in botany. But the year 
17 1 8 is remarkable for the publica^j^on of Ruppius's excellent 
Flora JenenfiS) and the following for the appearance of Scheuch- 
zer's inimitable Agroftographia and Dillenius's Flora Giflenfis^ 
Ruppius being cut off early in life, difappointed the hopes which 
were formed of him. Dillenius is one of the moft illuftrious* names 
in botany; not fo nrach indeed for fyftematic or phyfiobgical 
merit, as for accuracy of obfervation and judicious criticifm* 
About this time alfo flouriftied Pontedera at Padua, who although 
a great Tournefortian, and ftrangely prejudiced againft the fexes of 
plants, was a fcientific botanift, and is very liberally praifed by 
Linnaeus, againft whom he is faid neverthelefs to have writtenr 
fomething, which was never publifhed. 

The removal of Dillenius to Eilgland, who publiflied here his 
excellent edition of Ray'^s Synopfis Stirpium Britannicarum in 1724; 
the affiftance and encouragement given to the fcience by thofe two 
diftinguifhed brothers William and James Sherard^ as well as by 
Sir Hans Sloane, feemed to promife the eftablifliment of the botanic 
fceptre in this country ; efpecially as the infuffidency of Toume- 
fort's fyftem became every day more obvious, and Boerhaave was 
too much occupied by medicine, to devote any confiderable fhare 
of his powers to any other purfuit. The phyfick garden at Chel- 
4 fea 



Da. SmithV IntroduBory Difcourfe. 29 

fea was in a very flourifhing (late under the care of the celebrated 
Mnier, and that of Mr. Sherard at Eltham contained one of the 
choiceft coile6tions in Europe. But botanifts were almoft at a (land 
about arrangement. All the different fyftems which had been 
propofcd, however fpecious in univerfity le&ures^ having been 
found very infuffident for the purpofes of practical botany^ the 
fcience was again in danger of relapfing into anarchy and confiifion, 
and botanifts were almoft overwhelmed with the riches which daily 
flowed in upon them. 

In this ftate of things a new turn was given to the fcience of 
botany, and indeed to all natural hiftory> by the publication of the 
Syftema Naturae and Fundamenta Botanica of Linnseus in 1735* 
Nor were the learned world determined how they fhould receive 
thefe extraordinary produ6Uons, when in 1737 the fame author, 
without any other fupport than his own tranfcendent merit, fixed 
the attention of all Europe, by his Critica Botanica, Genera Plan- 
tarum, Hortus ClifFortianus, Flora Lapponica and Methodus Sexu* 
alis ; five works, the produce of one year, each of which would 
alone have been fufficient to have immortalized its author, and in 
the compofition of which a man's whole life might have been 
thought ufefuUy employed ! 

Having by a number of original obfervations, added to thofe of 
former writers, demonftrated the fexes of plants, and confequently 
the importance of their ftamina and piftilla; Linnaeus founded his 
fexualfyftem on the differences in number, fituation and proportion 
of thefe organs : a fyftem which, althoxigh profefTedly merely arti^ 
fcialj is really in many refpedls more agreeable to nature than many 
which had preceded it, and which, for facility and univerfality, has a 
decided fuperiority over all hitherto invented. But this was only a 
part of the praife of this rifing genius. Having new modelled and. 
fyftematically defined all the known genera of plants,, he endeavoured 

in 



jd 0ft. SMiTH'i IfitroduRory Difcourjk 

in like manner to define the fpecies upon philofophical principles ; a 
thing hitherto unknown, or at lead but faintly attempted by fome 
old botanifts. Of the fuccefs of Linnaeus in this undertaking, as 
well as his judgment and accuracy in colle6ting fynonyms, the 
Hortus CliiFortianus and Flora Lapponica afford fufficient proofs. 
In them may be feen the dawning of thofe talents which afterwards 
produced the Species Plantarum ; while the dida6t:ic precifion and 
critical acutenefs of the Fundamenta and Critica, gave a foretafte 
of that perfe6tion which was hereafter to appear in the Philofophia 
Botanica. 

Nor were the abilities of Linnaeus lefs confpicuous in his diftri-> 
bution of the animal kingdom. Of this the firft eiiition of the 
Syftema Naturae was but a (ketch, which was afterwards correfted 
and much enlarged^ It is unneeeflary here to enter upon the 
particulars of his fyftem, which has been familiar to all naturalifts 
for thefe 50 years. I fhall only fay, that what in my opinion are 
the beft parts of it, -the claffes of birds and infefts, were altogether 
original. For the deteftion of the cflential charaflrer of the latter 
in their antennsc, we are entirely obliged to Linnaeus ; and his Sub- 
ordinate diftinftions were not only^ the firft, but long experience 
has proved them the beft, that have ever been invented. 

His arrangement of foffils, the beft at the time it was firft pub- 
liftied, is now generally neglefted. Although in fome inftances 
founded on chemical principles, in others the moft obvious laws of 
chemiftry were facrificcd to external figure ; and the fcience having 
been of late years fo totally reformed, it is no wonder that Lin- 
naeus's Regnum Lapideum is become obfolete. 

This illuftrious man, returning in 1739 to Sweden his native 
country, there fixed the throne of Natural Hiftory. Soon after his 
arrival he helped to lay the foundation of the Academy of Sciences 
at Stockholnf, of which he was the firft prefident. His diftin- 

guiftied 



Dr. Smith^x IntraduSory Difcmirfi. 31 

gtiiihed merit and amiable manners procured him the favour of the 
rich and powerfulf as well as the attention and admiration of the 
fcientific; and his medical and botanical lectures at Upfal foon at- 
trailed a number of ftudents from all parts of the world, and ex* 
alted that univeriity to a degree of fame hitherto unknown. 

It is true^ he did not efcape the attacks of envy and jealoufy ; 
nor can any exalted chara6ler, however inoffenfive and prudent) 
hope to efcape them. But they never put him fo much off his 
guard as tctwafte his time in controverfy, nor would he give his 
advcrfaries immortality, by tranfmitting their names to poftcrity 
with his own. I fhall on the prefent occafion follow his example ; 
nor drag from obfcurity works long fmce forgotten, or authors 
Who never were noticed. I cannot butobferve, however, that pro- 
feffor Siege(beck, notwithftanding his intemperate zeal in attacking 
the fexes of plants and Linnaeus's fyftem with all the arms he 
could mufter, both facrcd and profane, was by no means the moft 
contemptible of all the authors on that fide the queftion. He 
has been unfortunate enough to be always held forth as the botanic 
Zoilus; but I think there have been fome critics, even in our own 
country, who for futility, ignorance and malevolence, would have 
much greater claims to that title, if they were of confequence 
enough to claim any title at all. 

We muft now confider fome of the rhoft eminent naturalifts 
who were contemporaries with Linnaeus in the beginning of his 
literary career, and whofe labours tended effentially to the advance- 
ment of the fcience. It would be endlefs to enumerate all who 
have cultivated or written upon, natural hiftory during this golden 
age ; we can only notice a few of the moft diftinguifhed. 

His moft intimate companions at this time were Artedi and Gro- 
novius ; the former of whom lias in his Ichthyology difcovered fuch 

talents 



^l Dr. SmithV IntroduSlory Difcourfe. 

talents for natural hiftoiy, that his premature death cannot be 
fufficiently regretted. Gronovius has contributed in various ways 
to the advancement of the fcience. His Flora Virginica and his 
zoological works are conftrufted upon Linnaean principles* 
lie was ahvays in amicable correfpondence with Linnseus; as con- 
ftant in the offices of friendfhip as deaf to the impulfes of envy and 
jealoufy. It was Gronovius who had th^ honour of naming the 
Linnaea after his illuftrious friend. 

One of the greateft and moft extenfive geniufes of ^is or any 
age was Haller, that great phyfiologift and unwearied obferver> 
who, though at firft the friend, afterwards became the rival, and 
the only refpedtable rival, of Linnaeus, compared with whom all 
his other criticks fmk into nothing. What a pity it is thefe illuf- 
trious men were not always friends ! What a pity the memory 
of Haller fhould have been difgraced by the publication of thofc 
confidential letters, the revifal of which one would have thought 
fufficient to difarm the moft inveterate mind ! 



-<< Tantaeoe aniinis ccdeftibus irac ?' 



I muft however refcue the name of Haller as much as poffible 
from this foul ftain. On a careful enquiry among thofe who 
alone could fatisfy me on the fubjed, I am inclined to think his 
powers of body and mind were fo enfeebled that he may be faid to 
have been not himfelf at the time thefe letters were publifhed, and 
probably never revifed them. Elfe can we fuppofe a charader 
like his would fo grofsly have violated, not only the confidence of 
friendftiip, but even the laws of paternal afFedion ? for in that 
colle6tion are letters of one of his fons, then no more, which no 
father ought to have made publick. Perhaps the temptation of 

producing 



D». Shames Introdu&ory Difcourfe. 33 

producing fuch teftimonies of his own celebrity was, in the weak- 
nefs of old ^e^ too flattering to that vanity ^om which Haller is 
acknowledged not to have been free. Neither was Linna&us himfelf 
without his fhare of it ; and if vanity were never found but with 
fuch pretenfions, who would not almoll forget that it were a 
weaknefs ? 

I cannot attempt to enumerate all the works of Haller, much 
lefs to difplay their merits. His hiftory of the Switzerland plants 
isoneof themofi excellent and complete Floras the world ever faw 
and is only deprived of the general applaufe it deferves, by the 
author's unconquerable diflike to the Linnaean clafTification and 
nomenclature^ by which his work is rendered extremely unfit for 
common ufe. His Phyfiology, Bibliothcca Anatomica and Biblio- 
theca Botanica^ are among the moft flupendous monuments of 
human knowledge as well as of human labour. They defy imitation 
and ftrike criticifm dumb. 

Another diftinguifhed name alfo cldms our attention, that of 
Reaumur. I know ncxie more worthy to ftand next to Haller. 
Befides the various difcoveries of this great French naturalift which 
were of immediate ufe in improving the arts and manufa6i:ures of 
his own country, the philofophical world at large will ever be in- 
debted to him for his inveftigations of fome of the moft intricate 
parts of natural hiftory. His ex|>eriments on digeftion, on the 
fruftification of marine plants and on corals, are all celebrated, 
although with refpe6t to the latter he was miftaben in denying 
their animal nature; but his immortal work is his •^ Memoires 
pour fervir a THiftoire des Infedles," in 6 volumes, quarto ; and he 
has publiftied a variety of detached pieces relating to the fame 
fubje6t. 

The Italians poffeffed a fimilar genius to Reaumur in Vallifneri, 
whofe experiments relating to generation, and his candour in giving 

F up 



34 r>R« SmithV Introdutiory Difcourfe. 

up his firft opinion on that fubjeft, merit great commendation, as 
well as his inveftigations of inteftinal animalcula. Vallifneri was 
profeflbr of the pra6lice of medicine at Padua, and died in 1730* 
His works, berng only in Italian, are not fo much read as they 
deferve to be. 

The fame country had the honour of producing another moft 
excellent obferver in Micheli of Florence, whofe Nova Genera 
Plantarum, publifhed in 1729, is a fundamental book in botany; it 
has the rare merit of being a work of original and accurate obfer- 
vation in the mod difficult of all plants, grafles, mofles and fungi. 
If Dillenius and Linnaeus had paid due regard to his obfervations, 
they would not have fo totally mifunderftood the £ru6lification of 
mofles as to take the capfule for the anthera. The world may ftill 
hope for more information from this excellent man, on the publi- 
cation of his manufcripts, now in the hands of Mr. Targipni Toz- 
zetti, the worthy pofleflbr of all his remains. 

This leads me to mention the Hiftoria Mufcorum, publiQied by 
Dillenius in 1 741, that matchlefs work which, for the accurate 
delineation and determination of fpecies, has never been rivalled in 
any department of botany, much lefs in that which it illuftratcs. 
This author has made the intricate tribe of mofles and algae com- 
paratively eafy ; without fuch a writer they would all probably have 
continued the opprobrium of botany, as fungi and confervas are 
ftill. -^ 

A work worthy to be cdmpared with this of Dillenius, for the 
more than Herculean labour which was employed in its compofition^ 
is the Hierobotanicon of Olaus Celfius, profeflbr of divinity at 
Upfal, and one of the firft and warmeft patrons of Linnaeus. He 
travelled to the Eaft oh purpofe to enquire into the plants of fcrip- 
ture,' the- determination of which was his darling obje<5l for more 
than 50 years. His book was not efteemed as it deferved till its 

author 



Dr. SmithV IntroduSlory Difcourfe.^ ^ 35 

author was no more. There having been but 200 copies printed, it 
is now very rare, and is one of thofe works which are oftener 
talked of than read. 

I {hall only at prefent mention the names of two more writers, 
who chiefly diftinguiftied themfelves in vegetable phyfiology, Du 
Hamel and Hales. One of them was the ornament of France, and 
the other of our own country, about the period of which I have 
been fpeaking,- and both have rendered great fervices to philofo- 
phical botany. 

In the mean while Linnaeus was daily advancing in fcience and 
reputation. His Fauna Suecica appeared in 1746, and his Materia 
Medicain 1749 ; the former is a model of defcriptive zoology, as the 
latter of methodical arrangement and concifenefs. They were both 
afterwards very much improved and enlarged, but the Materia 
Medica was never republifhed by Linnfeus ; all the new editions of 
it are by Profeffor Schreber, and the alterations are his own. 

In 1751 appeared the Philofophia Botanica, and two years after- 
wards the fir ft edition of the Species Plantarum j two works which it 
were equally vain and fuperfluous to attempt to praife as they 
deferve. I (hall only remark that the introdu6lion of trivial names j 
wtiich firft took place in the Species Plantarum, was one of the moft 
happy inventions of Linnaeus, and I am perfuaded it has con- 
tributed more than any thing elfe to make his works of general 
ufe. Even thofe botanifts who from envy would never openly 
adopt them, have given the moft convincing proofs of the im- 
portance of which they thought them, in labouring to deprive 
Linnaeus of the honour of their invention; and I could mention 
inftances of people, who have written againft thefe trivial names, 
being obliged to recur to them daily in fpeaking and writing of 
plants. 

The fame of Linnaeus was now fo widely difFufed that, as his 

F 2 excellent 



n 



36 . •Dr. SImith'x IntroduSlory Blfcourfi, 

excellent biographer Dr. Pulteney has obferved, he began fcarceiy 
to feel the difadvantages. of his northern (ituation. He had dif- 
ciples in every part of the world who vied with each other in fending 
him aH the objects of natural hiftory they could procure, fo that 
his cabinet and his. garden were equally enriched. At the fame 
time moft of the teamed focieties in Europe were proud to enrol 
him among their members, and even kings contended for the pof- 
feflion of hira^ He was Maply indemnfiied for declining the 
generous offers of the Spanifti monarch, by the honours and ad- 
vantages heaped upon him by his own fovereign. He received the 
rank of nobility, which in Sweden is neither a trifling nor a barren 
honour, and was made a knight of the Polar Star. This was the 
firft inftance of that order having been conferred upon literary 
merit; certainly it could never have been bellowed with greater 
propriety on any one than on Linnaeus, who was himfelf that 
bright polar ftar to which the fcientific world looked up for aflift- 
ance and direction. 

This then may be reckoned the moft flburifhing period' of 
Natural Hiftory, when difputes about methods and fyftems being 
for the moft part laid afidc, every admirer of Nature's works was 
employed in pra6tical obfervations and difcoveries ;: while Linnaeus,, 
whom nothing efcaped, and to whofe decifion all doubts and dif- 
ficulties were referred, fupervifed* and- methodized the whole. His 
improvements had fo much facilitated the ftudy of botany, that it 
was no longer an abftrufe fcienc6 confined to the fchools, but 
became an agreeable amufement taperfons of leifure in all ranks 
and fituations. 

About this time fome moft fuperb works in. natural hiftory 
were given to the public which, although not very fyftematic, were 
of ufe to the fcience ; as Seba^s Thefaurus Rerum Naturalium, the 
firft volume of which appeared in 1734, and the fecond in 1735^ 

the 



Dr. Smith's IniroduSlory Dlfcourfi. 37 

the two following ones not having been publiflied till many years 
after; Catcfey's NaturalHiftoryof Carolina, Florida, &c. of which the 
firft volume was printed in 1731 and the fecond in 1743 5 Edwards's? 
Hiftory of Birds, begun in 1743 ; and fome others of lefs note* A 
work of a fuperior kind was publiflied at Florence in 1742, entitled 
Gualtieri Index Teftarum Conchyliorum, which is remarkable for 
the perfection of its fpecific differences of fliells, in which the 
author feems clofely to have imitated the ftyle of the botanical 
works of his countryman Micheli. This is one of the mod ufeful 
books of reference that we have in conchology, and in my opinion 
is for preferable to the work of d'Argenville printed the fame 
year^ although perhaps lefs complete than the new and enlarged 
edition of that book lately publiflied. 

In £ngland horticulture feems now to have made great progcefs^ 
Few have improved that art fo much as the celebrated Miller ; and 
k is hardly fair to reproach him with not having perfefted it*. 
Bartram was Cent to America for the purpofe of fupplying our 
gardens with plants, and we are much indebted ta him, as well a& 
to Houftoun, who difcovered many rare vegetables in South America 
and the Weft Indies,^ and whofe remains, long neglected, are now 
refcued from oblivion. 

In Holland botany was ably fupportcd by the labours of the twa . 
profefTors Van Royen at Leyden, and the affiduous Burmax^ 
profeffor at Amfterdam* The Thefaurus Zeylanicus and Decades 
Plant; Africanarum of the latter are excellent books;, fome of the 
figures inr this laft which I find Linnaeus fufpei5ied to be erroneous, 
or even fi6titiouSt have fince been found faithftil. Burman had 
alfo the honour of publifliing a large volume of the figures of 
Plumier, from copies of the original drawings, which had long 
tain buried at Paris, as the greater part of that admirable authorV 
works ftill do) eclipfed by more fplendid produdions^^ 

6 Ii» 



3$ Dr. SmithV IntroduSlory Difcourfe. 

In Germany Profeffor Ludwig of Leipfie was now in great repu- 
tation ; and he has ftiewn himfelf an able phyfiologift and accurate 
obferver. He profeffed to differ in many points from Linnaeus, 
but oppofed him with decency ; and indeed it appears, as. a noble 
author of; our own country has lately remarked, that Ludwig, as 
well as Haller, were only ^^ Linnaeans in difguife;" they profited 
of the lights they had received from him to build fyftems to rival 
his own. 

Nowhere have the Linnaean improvements been more flowly 
received than in France, which is to be attributed not only to the 
jcaloufy of that nation for the fame of her immortal Tournefort, 
but alfo to her poffeffing fome confummate botanifts, of fufficient 
confequence to fupport for a time any fyftem they fhould choofe to 
cfpoufe. Among thefe the family of the Juflieus claim the firft 
place, and efpecially Bernard dc Juffieu, a name never raentiofled 
without refpeft. Even at Paris however Linnasus had early an 
illuftrious protestor in the Duke d*Ayen, now Marechal de 
Noailles, who correfponded with him long, procured him the notice 
and favour of the late king, and occarione4 his majefty to fend him 
a prcfent of feeds from his own garden at ,Trianon. The work 
of Adanfon has alfo done fervice to the Linnaean caufe, although 
certainly that wais what its author leall intended; but this is one 
of thofc books every reader of which muft diffent from the ^Aithor's 
opinions. In the fouth of France Linnaeus had more admirers. 
Profeffor Gouan of Montpellier has adopted his principles both in 
his ichthyological and botanical works ; and the excellent Gerard in 
his Flora Galloprovincialis, although he has not followed the 
fyftem of Linnaeus, is every where clofely attached to his principles, 
and has ever been an enthufiaftic admirer of his merit. Nor muft 
I forget Profeffor Sauvages of Montpellier, who generoufly pre- 
fented Linnaeus with his whole herbarium, rich in the plants of 

that 



Dtu Smith*! tntroiuSlory Dj/courft. 39 

that ddightful country; nor his friend Monfieur Le Monnier, one 
of the warraeft admirers of the illiiftrious Swede. « This gentleman 
was f^ntto the fouth of France afi a botahift in 1740, with fome 
other ,philofophers who went there for aftronortiicTal purpofes. 
Afterwards he bwrame firft phyficlan to Lbuift XV^ and no^3ir enjoys 
his ** Qtium £um^digniiateV ia a. delighlifiql; retirement near Veirfailles^ 
where he pay« particnlar attention to the cultivation of trees and 
ihrubs^ and poflefles one of the rich'eft herbariums'in' France. 
' r At B^lin- bdtany and' Linnaeus had'lctog a aoble fupport in 
fep6f«ffoir Gleditfch, iwho'foft- principally diftinguiftjed himfelf by 
anfwerii>g Siegcfbeck's criticifm of the Linnaean fyitem; and his 
victory was decided indeed wHefl Siegefbeck publi^ed \^s Fanilo^ 
quentia Gle^iffchiana Specimen; in the firift paragraph of which that 
writer gives him what may almoft be called ^^ the lie direft.'* 
But Glcdkfch was better employed than in returning k. He ap- 
plied himfelf to the inveftigation of the obfcure phyfiology of 
Fungi and other ordefs of the Gf3rptoganii^, and in 1753 pubiiflied 
aft able and elaborate ^w^rkfeiititSed.Met^hbdus-FHngort The 
Memoiis x>f ^ the Berlin Sbciety abound 'with excellent treatifes of 
this author relating to agriculture and rural oicononliy. Nor did 
he negledt fyftematic botany. By no means a fervile follower of . 
Linnaeus, he publifhed iii 1764 a fyftem founded on the fituation 
of the ftamina, the principle of which is good, and muft always be 
kept in view by all botanifts; but the claffes of Gleditfch being 
folely founded on this circumftance, are neceffarily too few : his 
orders are borrowed from the claiTes of Linnasus. 

Botanical works were daily multiplying in various parts of Europe, 
In 1745 appeared Leche's Primitiae Florae Scanicae, and Seguier's 
rich catalogue of the Plantae Veronenfes. It has been alledged by 
fome faftidbus people, that the prefent century, and efpecially the 
Linnaean age, has been overburthened with luch kind of catalogues, 

3 which 



4^ Dr« SmithV IfOrodu&ory Difcourfe. 

which require no abilities in their compofition, and anfwcrnopurpofe 
when done. A French writer, whom I am tired of naming, has 
declared himfelf of this opinion ; and his own pra6Uce has been fo 
conformable to it, that he has never favoured the world with an 
account of the plants of Senegal, a country which he went pur- 
pofely to inveftigate. Happily all good botanifts have not imitated 
him, or we fhould never have feen Scopoli's ineftimable Flora 
Ganyolica, the various Floras of AUioni, De Gorter, Gunner, 
Hudfon, Gouan, Leers, Pollich, Weis and many others, which 
have been of great ufe to local, and indeed general botany j and 
even if every one of the valuable works juft mentioned had been 
ufelefs, who would not have thought them fufficiently atoned for 
by the Flora Lapponica and Flora Suecica of Linnseus ? 

I am now led to confider the fervices rendered to natural hiftory 
by the various difciples of this eminent man, and others, who have 
undertaken hazardous and laborious journeys, on purpofe to ex- 
amine the produftions of countries hitherto ribt at all or but 
ilightly inveftigated. And what praife does not the ardour of fuch 
a£tive promoters of fcieiice deferve? As no one ever felt more of 
this ardour than Linnaeus, when the humble attraffcions of an 
ar6tic flora incited him to undertake his painful Lapland tour ; fo 
I think none has been fo fuccefsful as this great man in exciting 
the faix^c fpirit in others^ Before I fpeak of his pupils, however, 
the order of time obliges me to mention Buxbaum and Gmelin. 
The former may be flightly pafled oven He was fent by the 
Peterfburg Academy to coUeft plants in the Levant* The fruits 
of his labours are pubhfhed in five Centuriae, with wretched plates 
and very indifferent defcriptions. The fame fociety were much 
more fortunate in their choice of Gmelin to undertake the 
examination of Siberia. That country had before been vifited by 
Gfjrber and fome .otlaer botanifts, but their acquifitions were 

trifling 



Db. Smith*j IntrodftMory Dijcourfe, 41 

tri^i^<i<¥^^''^ fvith thofe pfQipeJinf who fpent i6 years, viz. from 
^733(043 iat'Silxaria. His Flora Sibirica, now increaifed to fouf 
volumes quaitD, with an immenfe number of figures, and excellent 
detfrrip^n^ and fjrnonyms, is one of the belt works of the kind» 
aii4; (Pif^^Hi^ 9i*By very rare plants. ; .Philip Frederick, the birother 
of thisc^thprt has written: 0/i^ Botamc4 and fome other things^ 
Samuel Gottlieb -Omelin, fon of the lafl: mentioned, is celebrated 
for his hiftory of the genus Focus, printed at Peterfburg in 1768. 

Th)^ exppdi^ipn of Temftroem, pne of the firft of Linnaeus's 
difclples whom the . fpirit of curiofity led to vifit countries far 
remote fjrom his own, was an imfortunate one. This young man 
undertook a voyage to China in 17459 but died at Poulicaindon 
We have no hiftory of his voyage. His memory is honoured 
with, a plant in the Supplementum Plantanim at the inftigation of 
Mutis, for Linnseus himfelf had not an high opinion of his merit* 

Kalnij who vifited North America in 17479 was more fortunate. 
His travels are fo well known, from the account of them tranflated 
into Englii^, that I need fay little about them. His botanical dif- 
coveries ; yery materially enriched the Species Plantanim of his 
great mafter, and the Linnxan Herbarium abounds with fp^ci* 
mens brought home by him, diftinguifhed by the letter K. His 
own colle£tion of dried plants is faid to be mouldering away in 
Sweden, in 

" The lumber garret of his wifer heir.'* 

Haffelquift vifited Egypt and the Holy Land in 1749. No one 
has (hewn greater zeal or a6livity than this ingenious young man, 
whofe premature death cannot be too much regretted. He was 
alike (kilful in zoology and botany, as the account of his travels 
publi()jied by Linnaeus, and fince tranflated into Englifh, fufgciently 
^ws» In vain has an invidious author, who has himfelf long en- 

G joyed 



42 Dr. Smith*j IntroJuSiWy Dtfcourfc. 

joyed an unfubftantial reputation, endeavoured to blaft the memory 
of HafTelquift. His calumnies have been refuted by Dr. Splrrman^ 
who has juftly defended his countryman. 

Ofbeck, another traveller well known in England from the 
tranflation of his voyage, went to the Eaft Indies in 1750, as chap- 
lain to a Swedifti (hip. He fpent fome time in China, of the natu- 
ral hiftory of which he has told us much, and has made known 
many new plants, among which is the Ofbeckia, 

Loefling, a favourite difciple of Linnaeus and an excellent botanift^ 
undertook the examination of Spain in 175 1, where he found many 
new and rare plants, and probably would have made many more 
difboveries^ had his flay been longer in that rich, and hitherto al- 
mod unexplored country ; but he left it for one ftill more interefl- 
ing. South America, where he would, no doubt, have made a rich 
harveft, had his life and health been continued ; but he was foon 
cut off at the age of 27. His letters and botanical defcriptions 
have been publifhed by his illuflrious mafter, who, in this inftance, 
as well as on every other occafion, has given proofs of that fenii- 
bility which muft ever make him as dear to humanity as to fcience« 

I forbear to enlarge upon other expeditions of lefs note, as thafe 
of Montin and Solander to Lapland, Bergius and Falk to Goth- 
land, &c. although each contributed to the general ftock of natural 
knowledge very much. It is to be regretted we have not had 
more information from Rolander, who vifited Surinam and St, 
Euftatia in 1755. He fent home indeed feveral curious infe6ts, 
mentioned in the Syftema Naturae; but I find, by a letter of 
Linnaeus to Gerard, that he efteemed Rolander the firft entomo- 
logift after Reaumur. A pupil of Linnaeus, named Martin, vifited 
Spitzbergen in 1758 : he muft not be confounded with Martens, 
who went to the fame country in 1671, and whofe rude figures 
are quoted by Linnaeus. J muft not omit Toren, who went twice 

to 



Dr. SuitbV IntnJbiBory Dijcourfe. 43 

ta the Eaii: Indies^ and defcribed his whole voyage in letters to 
Linnaeus, enriched with many obfervations relating to natural hif* 
ftory^ all which were publiflied with Oibeck's voyage^ and tranf* 
lated into Englifh by Dr. Forften 

I am led to confider fome of the moft illuftrious naturalifts of 
the prefent age, whofe works aod whofe difcoveries have been long 
f6 generally known as almoft to preclifide the neceffity of mentioning 
them, were it not neceflary to the uniformity of my plan. Of 
thefe Profeflbr Jacquin claiiilj the firft place. He was firft known 
by his Hiftoria Plantarum Americananim, publiihed in 1763, in 
folioy with many figures, and which cohtains defcriptions of a vaft 
aumber of plants of South AmetiCa, fcarcely ever feen by any body 
elfe. This book has latdy been republifhed, without any material 
addition, except that the plates are coloured; for its illuftrious 
arutbor has of late y^ars ^pp^ed.bimfelf to the improvement of 
'botanical ichnography in the moft eminent manner. Who has 
not feen and. admired his Hortus Vindobomenfis . and Flora 
Auftriaca? And we have now no longer to regret the want of 
J^Mia fpctfica in the wpjks of Jacquin ; for, with a degree of can- 
dor which does him the higheft honour, he has jdeigned to liften to 
the remonftrahce of the youtiger Linn^us on this fubjedl, and has 
given the eiTential chara^ers of all the plants figured in his Icones 
Pltntahim rariorum. 

Another celebrated wdrk is Bipwn's Hiftory of Jamaica, publifticd 
in 1756, and now very rare, as the copies remaining at the book* 
feller's, after the firft fale of the book, were burnt. Its elegant 
plates were drawn by Ehret, the beft botanical draftfman of his 
time. The . herbarium of Dr. Browne, who is ftill living in 
Ireland, was bought by Dr. Soland^r many years ago, and fent to 
JLinnaeus: the fpecimens.are not fplendid, but important for the 
determination of many obfcure plants. 

G 2 Two 



^Tvt« lii]ierb pYiMcaSrione were, iek on fdotibjr r<^ muHifkknce 
m £>dnffii4^k, RegQnfxt&'S hiftor^ of flielis, '(and fchdJ^jor^- Ehuiica« 
Th* former has, I thmk,ihi fiiperidrity Iri pomt of execution- over 
moft works in natural hiftory, except, perhaps. Baron Bom's ac- 
cdijnt of «he fticUs in the Imperial Mufetiitt at Vienna.' • ^ The iFlbra 
Dam<:a, whJk tiUder the dire^ion of Odder, wais eqxiailf •wieli jexeM 
cuted; btit Profefibr MtiUe^ mott of a Jsoologiik thun xhoTanift^ 
cohtiniied it with Ief& care and pe^fe6fcio(i« its repntation^will, I 
doubt ndt, foon be abundantly reftored by the abilities of Rrofieffar 
Vahl, ftf whofe cao^eit ismowenthifted. : ; . ),. . : ».; , 

We ittuft now look back a littfe to \cndea.vour to do Juftice to 
fome great names in zoology. The age of Linnsetis htobetono 
Icfs brilliant in this branch of natural hiftory than in botaiiy : birt 
before I enter upcm the works of his immediate difcipbea-ov fpdlowbr% 
I tnuft fp^k of bis "advetfary Klein, who objected 'to feveral oihm 
alterations in ibofogy, with more reafon oft hi» iidie than any^of 
the botanical opponents of Linnaeus ever had; ftill his remarks 
have not been much attended to.^ He alfoy like iall the other adr 
vcrfkries of our great tiachec, liaboured ttf find bi»t coiitradi^ti^ 
in his Wdrks; as if tlie irfegularities of IvTattire were tb be laid t^ 
the charge of him, whofe worfcs aiid whofe fyftcm are often obt 
fcure, merely from their confonancy with Nature. Klein defenret 
great praife for his multifarious works in zoology; he. has left 
fcarcely any part of the fciej^ce untouched, and has treated it both 
fyftcmatically and phyfiologically. ' I . • ;^ . 

I haftcn to a bright ornament of our own oountry, the ingenious^ 
accurate and patient Ellis, whofe difcoveries relating to corallines form 
one of the moft interefting events in the natural hiftoyy of the 
prefent century, and whofe name wUl ever be revered while vfciea^- 
tific or perfonal merit are held in efteem. Nor is it poffible for me, 
in paying this tribute to the memory of Mr. fiUis, to forget his 

friend 



IrlonB^'afidi i«^ wnMtvpat Vtci GMdeni iJto ichoiar LinfMu« v^iftf^ 
imibUoo1(ligflil iu: his lacft. ^itroifc'bf 'like; rfiyftem^NatpBiK thai: I 
thittk Ub .naqirbcecimtiierBMsorei^qa^tljr. ::Thjf<.geiftlQiiiaR«r 
Id&g lefldent in. Pafotindyis^oelebratod' for :ius ^UtOKOi^ of thei 
Sken-hecatiiu, thtt fe^hc ailiiaaif^U ioOrhich. Lquu^uSh'vvM ob^ 
^d<ito fiAinaneiribrdterliw hMi.ff^Qbem. . Dc^iG«rdeai^ti9Wfre« 
Mttied to^Hns-cnibiliy. : lioA^inair i^ stmaJi libertj ta 

pof tiiat'ttAiidri^vidd tribute.to his medtr^bkhrl hav«{^v^tt to the 
departed. EJlis! 

' >lt>id-^tr^ kfuilm-^hat MrlEiUisrniras on^o£ tlie!!firft.^6x:lcati3r 
nadeicue^ithe aki;iiiia|'fiflk3iceof coniUineat 'ii)d iik dpidion on thd 
f«^jt£bkJiofV(r,uhiveifaUy> adopted. . In tHei)^iiu!uog». however, he 
hod-AnoppOQeut in Dr. Bafter, a Dutch naturalift, who main- 
tained a coAtraiiy opinion^ aod^argqed with great ingwuity for the 
V«^et3tk>ief«atttcs'df lA\erficr bodies/ ifleiting.tfaat the ^jrpcs' were 
m^rily^ flcddeiitai inhabitatits of tfaem^^apd nirt apart of t^eir fuh* 
ftttnce. The fame Author haa - pubtiihed ieveral other wotks on 
difl^nt marine irife^s^ worms and plants j under the titi^of OpufcuU 
S^ifittkfat whicbara elaborate atid cimdHs: they are the perform- 
ances '<>f a real bb&rVer: »' ■ ' ' ■'■ - ■.,.'.'> 

This Intricate part of riati!#al hill<#y has been mveftigated t^ 
-ferefal other writerif) 'as Bohadfch and. Muller ; but t^ nqne more 
ably than the celebrated Pallas, whofe fydematic ^ork on Zoophyta 
is neceffkry to all who apply themfelVeS to t%i6 {tihdj. 
' ' Nof" branch -of; natortir biftdiy, ' «ifttr hotmyi has for fome 
years ji*ft had iriord attentiott paid to it thtai €lA6tAb\t>^ Hoc is 
thi^ tb bc' wondered at. - Botany- ncceflar3y leads to the ftudy of in- 
fers;' for it is impofliblc to ih^reftigatc plants in their native fitua- 
tionis, without hating OUT' attenticw perpetually 'awakened by the 
Imfinite vjrrifety of thofe a<9iire little beings, erapfojred in a thoiafand 
difierent troys in fupplying thcmfelves with food and lodgings in 

repulfmg 



46 Dr* Smru^s TntroJuffory Difcdurfe:" 

repuliing the attacks of their enedfiiesi^ or in exercifing a itiore thai| 
Afiatic defpotifm over myriads bdow thenii TThuis mzaf of thfl 
moft fyftematic botanifts of the prefent age, as Scopoli, Hudfon^ 
AUioni, have been led to the ftudy of entomology. Another clafif 
of authors have undertaken to pubiifh figures ofanfipdby as Suitaeie 
and Frifch> fometimes accompanied with their hiftory at: large^ 3i4 
in the excellent works of Rbefel and'Sepp^ I doubt .whether th^ 
coloured plates of the latter have ever been excelled in any depart- 
ment of natural hiftory. A moft elaborate work, confiiling only of 
coloured plates of infers,, was tmdeftakeh under thje irifpedk>n of 
LinnseuSy by Clerck, theauthor of which dying foon after it was 
publifhed, had time to colour a very few copies only, and thefe are 
much valued by the curious. In my.opinion this work is more rer 
markable for labour than ikill, and is far excelled by that of our 
countryman Mn Druty, which I hope I may> without being accufed 
of partiality, rank imong the.vJBry firft^jf its kind« I .need fay 
nothing of Albin and Wilkes, whofe plates were admired in their 
time, but are now ecUpfed by many. The Entomologia of Schsef^ 
fer, the celebrated liaturalift of |latifbon, ^o^well known by hi^ 
figures of Fungi, and other works, are very ably aii^d carefujlly 
executed. I have only two mofe entomological writers to mendon 
at prefent, but thofe are very illuflrious ones, Geoffroy and De Geer. 
The work of the former is an hiftory, in French, of the infefts 
found about Paris, with a few excellent plates, ^^hiefiy ^, e^cfunples 
of the different genera. This with the Entomologia Carnio^e of 
Scopoli, and the works of Linnseus, are the clafTical books indif- 
penfablynecefTary to every fyftematic fludentof European mfe6ts. 
Thofe who wifh to ftudy their hifbory and metamorphofes. more 
fully, will find ample fatisfadjtion in the ineflimable^work of. De 
Geer, which is a counterpart of that of Reaumur, and equally cis^ 
tenfive and accurate. Its author, a Swedifh nobleman, deferves to 

a be 



•be ras^ced among thoimoft ftble promoter^ of the fcience which he 
-cultivated. ' , 

. iX have befoee mentibned that the. botanical fyftem of Linnaeus 
ynA not fcadily f iceiyiB4 in France. Still \tii regard was paid thej;e 
•ibiiis yzdologtcal works ; md: this is principally to be attributed to 
thelattefe'C^'hia gr^at opponeiit the Count de Buffon,.whofe 
fplendid. publications arid captivating ftyle of writing, fo well calcu- 
lated to dazzle t^ multitude and to charm the peojde ajjoong whom 
he lived, engrofled all the attention of; bis countrymen, and have 
been- admired' tHrohghout Euro^. Indeed thofe who are leaft 
partial to this cdebrated writer muft allow that he has contributed 
much to encourage and pconote the fludy of nature has made 
many valuaUe ob^rvationsy : and collected a variety of interefting 
fadts* ' W^ muft remember however that the &dts of fo theoretical 
a wiitter are always to be received withcautioa: not that I would 
fu^pe^t any phUofopber of wilful mifreprefentations, but a prudent 
theorift will fcarccly truft his own eyes; and the world are pretty 
wdl agreed that the hypotbefes of Bufibn are, for the moft part, 
•the very eflence of futility ; though feveral have laughed at them, 
few have taken the pains to refute them. 

The French have long pofTefled a more fyftematic writer in 
Briffon, whofe Eigne Amtnal has great merit, and whofe excellent 
and elaborate hiftory of birds, none who purfue that part of 
zoology call be without, 

England too has produced a genius, at leaft equal to the latter, in 
Mr. Pennant, who has almoft exhaufted the three firft clafles of the 
zoology of Great Britain, and whofe name and works are too cele* 
brated to need; my commendation here. 

Before I return to Linnaeus I muft mention the illuftrious Mr. 
Bonnet of Geneva, an enthufiaftic admirer of the works of nature, 
whofe candour and ingenuity cannot bujt obtaiaour efteem,. whether 

we 



tfc^ebpf H«^ifb«)oiri4l bt £i^< ' Thi&^a^t&opiirrfo^vnnaddaUyt/iiiatf- 
tentive to nomenclature and fyftematic arrangement, thA-duBt'saibriy 
«idniou$ eheffly'<it^ L>iAA£6tiis -K^s 'quoted Him as'Ja&xAm^txyfhis 
bwti^'ikilJtiilfetttfteftitsi'tf '<feat ^Wr'fflitt iAm>lfsaddlSQn iuttbmg 
<tbiM be'febrc iiflJu^'*HfeA% «i^e Bk«iet 4|»ailJ«ri^c)aicl»;AMb- 
wid^ty. ' Ha^fjy k-e thol^ tt^iife {>hais*pfifeete/nyb©^bJr>aBiittefetitJ»- 
to tile woticsof th« Or^atori'ajTfc l6d, l&e this amiable liiftr^,'td mtlKfe 
thmifelTes better t($/v««ll esiwifer, and to d^Sa&.notjonilyJknowledge 
t)tit'happiii«fe-6li''*ll^caitldi«h«m Jr^-J/- r -J} I'-i^ i.j . .> /,o.;i •. d 
Liftntetri, wh6fe^oWer«-iirer^tH5ginlniJigtQ^d«ttHiiei poMiihfiliii 
1771 the Mopoijii^altaut, whicliway bow)fafideifcd a» hts^botjaauci^ 
teftametit. It is* partly 'a calkaian of remarks fmd.f:ptxe&im» 
made at' : different titiies< and oomtariiM, . befides^ i€ittvptk>ns;^Qf:..ii 
number <tf new plant8,'6f wftiidi theTidi'rpommiihicati&ws of ,X>t. 
Mutis, from the Cdntinent io( Sooth Ametica, nuifce A.confiderr 
able part. This gentleman, and fome other Spanilh botainfts his 
friends, have had the good fortune of ihveftigating the .Countries of 
Mexico and new Granada, liiUherto little )kn<»\w tp frpt^yai^ ^ aod 
the fruits of their iildoftry were ali fent .toj LiimgepS' ,Ain9iig 
them, the great variety of beautiful and ^efy ejctraordinary new- 
plants of theclafs Syngenefia are remarkable, TJie.fineftpf all 
was honoured with, the name of Mutifia, an4 publifhed by the 
younger Ubnaeus in hi* Supplementupi PWntjs^nim, a woi;ktlwj 
foundation of which was laid by his illuftrioxis father not bug 
before his death. I forbear to enlarge upon this melancholy 
period of the hiftory of our fcience, which deprived it of its bright- 
eft ornaments The circumftaftces of the, deajth: of Linnxus, with 
the honours paid to his menaory, are known to al^J;{I^Oi; need 1 on 
the prcfeiit occafion make any artificial difphy pf his merits, or of 
the lofs which fcience fuftained by his death . I am convinced none 
of my hearers has any thing to loara on this fubjeft, and! would 
J rather 



Dr. SmithV IntroduStory Dijcourfe. 49 

rather prefer the more cheerful talk of tracing the fuccefs of his 
labours, and the efFe£t of the fpirit he had raifed, in the enterprifes 
and difcoveries of many eminent naturalifts, feveral of them his 
immediate pupils, whofe deferved fame reflected fuch diftinguiflied 
honour on the laft years of their great teacher. 

Here however a new difficulty prefents itfelf. In the former part 
of this difcourfe, having principally had occafion to fpeak of authors 
no longer living, and known to us chiefly by their works, I have, 
to the beft of my judgment, given an impartial and unreferved ac- 
count of their merits. Glaring defedbs have been generally pointed 
out, but I have rtiore frequently indulged in the more agreeable 
office of praifing merit of all kinds wherever it occurred. In {o 
doing I have not been aduated by a fenfclfefs veneration for former 
times, nor have I prepofterdufly aimed by a vain and ufelefs 

homage to . 

' — *«« Toothe the dull cold ear of death." 

To excite laudable emulation has been my only intention. But 
now that I find myfelf either treading (to ufe Dr. Johnfon's words) 
on afhes not yet cold, or am to fpeak of naturalifts with whom I am 
perfonally connefted, and of others whofe approbation and eftceni 
I cannot but be anxious to obtain, even the juft tribute of applaufe 
might appear like fervile adulation. This confideration, added to 
my having already extended my difcourfe to an immoderate length, 
will I hope juftify me in touching now but (lightly on many great 
names and many arduous undertakings, efpecially as I could but 
repeat fa6ts and circumftances familiar to all, and fhould run the 
rifque of exhaufting the patience of my hearers without giving 
them any information. I am perfuaded no one whom I have now 
the honour of addreffing needs to be informed of the merits of a 
Thunberg, Sparrman, Pallas, Fabricius, Swartz, or Hedwig, of the 
vaft phyfiolc^ical difcoveries of a Camper or Hunter, much lefs of 
the liberality and extenfive knowledge of a Banks, .or the genius 

H and 



50 Dr. SmithV IniroduSory Difcourfe. 

and worth of the ever to be lamented Solander. Who is not ac- 

quainted with every circumftance of that celebrated voyage round 

the \yorld, which has enriched every branch of natural knowledge 

in fo eminent a degree ? Who has not obferved with pleafure the 

laudable emulation of a neighbouring Country in promoting fimi- 

lar undertakings, to which we are indebted for the botanical ac- 

quifitioas of Commerfon, Sonnerat, Aublet and Dombey ? When I 

corifider all thefe, added to the difcoveries of Pallas in Siberia, of 

Sparrman, Maflbn and Thunbcrg at the Cape, and efpecially the 

acquifitions which the latter, undifmayed by the moft formidable 

difficulties, made in Japan ; when I contemplate the diftinguifhcd 

abilities of many other living naluralifts, the excellent publications 

of Schreber, RottboU, Retzius, Allioni, Scopoli, Brouffonet, L'Heri- 

tier, the philofophical Herman, and many others, not to mention. 

fome in our own country which may vie with any of thefe, I am 

induced to confider the prefent age as one of the moft propitious to 

the ftudy of nature, on the moft folid and philofophical principles ; 

and when I look around me at home, and fee how very much the 

love of botany in particular, and the cultivation of plants, is in- 

creafing among perfons of rank and fortune, as well as the trea- 

fures which are daily enriching our gardens and cabinets, I cannot 

help indulging the moft flattering hopes that my own country will 

jfoon in an eminent manner be diftinguiftied above the reft of 

Europe in thefe ufefal and pleafmg purfuits. But the degree of 

credit we have already acquired muft not lull us into a torpid 

fecurity. We muft keep in mind that France, our rival in power, 

is alfo our rival in fcience, and even at Paris Linnaeus has now his 

followers, who defpifing all national prejudices, dare to admire truth 

and genius wherever they find them. Let this excite in us a lauda^ 

ble fpirit of emulation; not the narrow^ealoufy which diftinguiflies 

thofe, who, confcious of their own weaknefs or undcfervcd reputa- 

1 tiouf^ 



Dr. SmithV Inirodu^ory Dlfcourfe. 51 

tion, dread every approach towards perfeftion in others. All who 
purfue the fame ftudies fhould labour together for the common 
good: every degree of afliftance, every deferved commendation 
which they give to each other, is the mod probable means of ad- 
vancing their own fame ; while every atom of ufurped honour, if it 
docs not immediately cover its vain poffeffor with opprobrium, is 
almofl: certain to be deducted with intereft from his charadter by a 
difceming and impartial pofterity. 

It now only remains for me to point out what I conceive to be 
the peculiar objefts of our prefent inftitution. I need not enforce 
the propriety of each of us endeavouring to promote as much as 
poflible the main ends of our undertaking, and to contribute all in 
our power to the general ftock of l^nowledge. Thefe are indifpenfa- 
ble obligations upon all who aflbciate themfclves with any literary 
fociety. Thofe who do not comply with them incur difgrace in- 
ftead of honour, for a title is but a reproach to thofe who do not 
deferve it ; nor can they have a (hare in the reputation of a fociety, 
who never in any manner contributed to its advancement. 

Befides an attention to natural hiftory in general, a peculiar re- 
gard to the produ6lions of our own country may be expelled from 
us. We have yet much to learn concerning many plants, which 
authors copy from one another as the produce of Great Britain,, 
but which few have feen ; and our animal productions are ftill lefs 
underftood. Whatever relates to the hiftory of thefe, their oeco- 
jiomy in the general plan of nature, or their ufe to man in parti- 
cular, is a proper obje6t for our enquiries. Of the productions of 
our own country we ought to make ourfelves perfectly matters, as 
no natural objeCt can any where be ftudied half fo well as in its 
native foil. This however not being always practicable, botanic 
gardens and cabinets of natural hiftory have been invented, in 
which the productions of the moft diftant climes are brought at 

H 2 once 



52 Dr. SmithV Introdtdhry Difconrfi. 

once before us. No country that I know of can bear a eomparifon 
with England in this refpeft. The royal garden at Kew is un- 
doubtedly the firft in the world, and we have a number of others, 
both public and private, each of which may vie with the moft cele- 
brated gardens of other countries. Nor have we a lefs decided 
fuperiority in Cabinets. That of the Britilh Mufeum, which con- 
tains among other things the original herbariums of Sloane^ 
Plukenet, Petiver, Kaempfer, Boerhaave, of many of the difciples ot 
Ray, and feveral others, be fides innumerable treafures of zoology, 
claims the firft place. That of the late Sir Afhton Lever ftands I 
believe unrivalled in birds and quadrupeds ; not to mention many 
others. But is it not a reproach to the naturalifts of Great Bri* 
tain that fo many rarities (hould remain in their hands undcfcribed ? 
that foreigners lliould eagerly catch at one or two plants obtained: 
from our gardens, which we for years have been trampling under 
foot unnoticed ? Yet how, till now, could fuch nondefcripts have- 
been made publick ? Large works in natural hiftory are expenfive 
and of hazardous fale ; few private people can undertake them ;. 
nor has there hitherto been any fociety to which detached de- 
fcriptions could be communicated. It is altogether incompatible 
with the plan of the Royal Society, engaged as it is in all the- 
branches of philofophy, to enter into the minutiae of natural 
hiftory ; fuch an inftitution therefore as ours is abfolutcly necef- 
fary, to prevent all the pains and expence of coUeftors, all the ex- 
perience of cultivators, all the remarks of real obfervers, from 
being loft to the world. The flighteft piece of information which 
may tend to the advancement of the fcience we ftiould thank- 
fully receive. However trifling in itfelf, yet combined with other 
faAs, it may become important. Whatever relates to the deter- 
mination of fpecies, even in the loweft and feemingly unimportant 
tribes of nature's works, ought never to be negledted. Nor let the 

humble 



Dr. Smith'/ IntroduSlory Di/cour/c. I 53 

liumble and patient ftudent of this very difficult part of natural 
hiftory be difcouraged by the fneers of the fupercilious coxcomb, 
or of the ignorant vulgar. He who determines with certainty a 
fingle fpecies of the minuteft mofs or meaneft infeft, adds fo far to 
the general flock of human knowledge, which is more than can be 
faid of many a celebrated name : no one can tell of what impor- 
tance that fimplc fa6l may be to future ages ; and when we confider 
how many millions of our fellow creatures pafs through life with- 
out furnifhing a fmgle atom to augment this flock, we fhall learn 
to think with more refpe6l of thofe who do. 

But nothing will be with more reafon expedted from the mem- 
bers of this fociety than a flridl attention to the laws and princi- 
ples of Linnaeus, fo far as they have been found to be good. No 
where have his works been more fludied and applied to pradlico 
than in this country, nor can arty other be fo competent to efli- 
mate his merits or correft his defe6ls. I am perfuaded nothing can 
be done more ufeful to the fcience of natural hiflory than, working 
on the publications of this illuflrious man as a foundation, to en- 
deavour to give them that perfe6lion of which they are capable, 
and to incorporate with them all new difcoveries. We who have 
it in our power to give real information, fhould defpife the filly 
vanity of making new fyflems or arrangements, merely for the 
fake of being talked of. An artificial method like that of Linnaeus 
may be changed a thoufand different ways, and each feem bell to 
its inventor. If any one, defpairing of getting immortality by any 
other means, fhould pleafe to name Cryptogamia the firll clafs and 
Monandria the lall, I fhould rank him but with Ghriflopher Knaut, 
who made about as wife an attempt upon the method of Ray. 

Whatever we may think of the fyflem of Linnaeus, there are 
certain great principles laid down by him, the excellence of which 
is now fo well known, and lb generally admitted, that none who 

4 pretends 



54 Dr. Smith'j Introdudiory Difcourfe. 

pretends to the name of a naturalift can avoid conforming to them. 
The laws, for inftance, according to which he conftrudled his 
generic names and fpecific differences^ which we fhould do well to 
imitate, although lefs ftriftly, in the application of trivial names. 
I hope never to fee any defcriptions fent into the world by this 
fociety without fpecific differences ; they are what diftinguifh a 
true fcientific naturalift from an empiric, and nothing but incapa- 
city in an author can make us pardon the want of them. Without 
a ftri6t attention to this maxim, the fcience will foon relapfe into 
its original barbarifm, nor can any thing but another Linnaeus 
reftore it. Let not the excellent work of my friend Mr. Latham 
be here cited againft me ; for that ingenious author is too judicious 
to have neglefted this material point ; he is poffpffed of the eflen- 
tial charadters of all his birds, and means to publifh them in a 
fyftematic form as a fupplement to his great work. I wifh I could 
make the fame apology for fome other eminent writers. But how 
would their works ftirink if reduced to Linnaean concifenefs and 
precifion ! 

A kind of knowledge which naturalifts have a right to expedl 
from us in a fuperior degree, is the accurate determination of the 
fpecies defcribed by Linnaeus, and indeed thofe of many other 
authors. Our accefs to the feveral original cpUeftions I have men- 
tioned, to the immenfe herbarium of Sir Jofeph Banks, whic^ 
contains the entire coUedlions of feveral celebrated botanifts, but 
more efpecially to the very herbarium and mufeum of Linnaeus 
himfelf, muft give us means of knowledge not to be had elfewhere. 
This is a fubje6t on which I fpeak with peculiar pleafure, as in this 
refpeft I may hope to be infinitely more ufeful to the prefent in- 
ftitution, than could have been expe6ted from any abilities of my 
awn. A train of events, which I cannot help calling moft fortu- 
nate^ having brought into my hands every thing which Linnaeus 

poffefled 



Dit. Smith^jt TntroduSlory Difcourji^ 55: 

poflef&d relating to natural hiftory or medicine, his entire library^ 
manufcripts, and the correfpondence of his whole life, as well as 
all the acquifitions made by the younger Linnseus in his tour 
through Europe, after his father^s dcceafe, but which his own 
premature death prevented him from communicating to the world j, 
aH thefe will be a never failing refource to us^ in every diflBculty, a& 
well as a fund of information not eafily to be exhaufted. For myr 
own part I confider myfelf as a truftee of the public, I hold thefe 
treafures oAly for the purpofe of making them ufeful to the world 
and natural hiftory in genfral, and particularly to this fociety, of ' 
which I glory in having contributed to lay the foundation, and to* 
the fervice of which I ftiall joyfully confecrate my labours, fo long^ 
as it continues to anfwer the purpofes for which it is deligned.. 



( 57 ) 



IL Ohferuations cnfime Extraneous Fqj^s of Switzerland^ ty M. TiNORYt 
Foreign Member of the Limuean Society ^ Denumftrator of CbenUftry and 
Natural Hijiory at Geneva^ &c. 

RcaJ yu^ t, lySS. 

L^TUDE de ia min6ralogie diilipe les doutes qu'on pourroit 
avoir fur les cataftrophes qui ont bouleverf6 le globe et (illonn6 
fa furface. Les blocs de granit detaches de leur mafie et tranfport^s 
fur des terrains calcaires, les vegetaux^ les animaux^ les pierres 
roul6es qu'on trouve dans fon fein a une grande profondeur, font 
des temoins irr^fragables qui d6pofent fur le travaU des eaux et fur 
les effets d^immenfes courants# 

Mais ces materiaux epars que Tadlivit^ des naturaliftes raflemble 
de toute part et qui invitent le philofophe a remonter aux caufes 
premieres de leur deplacement^ n'ont point encore redreff^ nos incer* 
titudes fur leur etat primitif, ni fur les 6poques des revolutions qui 
les ont alt6r6, modifi^ ou tranfport6 fur un fol qui leur eft Stranger. 
A cet ^gardy malgre tant d*hypothefes ing6nieufes, dont quelques 
unes plus d*accord avec les vraifemblances, ont pu ft^uire, Tefprit 
humain paroit reduit a n'enfanter que de merveilleufes chimeres ; 
tant nous fommes eloign^s de connoitre tons les corps qui font fu- 
bordonnes aux loix de notre fyfteme^ de fuivre leur marche et de 
calculer leur influence fur ceux qui n'ont point echapp6 a nos in- 
ftrumens. 

I Cependant 



58 M. TingrtV (Xfervations 

Cependant les foins employes a recueillir ces materiaux difTemin^s 
n'ont pas ct6 infrudlucux. S'ils nous paroiffent infuffifans pour 
nous*^lairer fur les caufes doign^ qui les^nt tpurmcnt^, du- 
moins peuvcnt-ils en d^montrer des effets certains relativement a 
notre pianette. Ses quatre parties renferment dans leur fein des 
fubilances yegetales et animales qui font abfolument ^trang^res a^iol 
qui les enfouit. L'Amferique «t notre Eurc^ prefentent aux re- 
cherches du naturalifte des depouilles de corps organifts dont les ana- 
logues paroiffent appartenir a llnde. II eft a prefumerque li I'Afie 
et TAfrique etoient mieux connues, quant a Thiftoire naturelle> 
elles ajouteroient de nouvelles d^itiohftrations aux faits deja en Evi- 
dence. Les colleftipns deviennent done a cet Egard des monu- 
mens pr^cieux ou font infcrits, en cara6teres ineffagables, les preuves 
les moins Equivoques des anciennes revolutions qui ont tourmehte 
le globe. - . 

On a fenti que les corps organif6s,enfouis a une profondeur inde- 

termin6e,ont du Eprouver des alterations plus ou moins achevEes, k 

raifon de leiir maffe, de kur organifation particuli^re et de Tinflu- 

cnce plus ou moins grande des matieres avec lefquelles ils ont et6 

confondus. C*eft de ce priricipe qu'on eft parti pour expliquer la 

formation des charbons foffiles, du bitume, de la poix, du petrole,, 

du naphte et des autres matieres minerales inflammables denudes de 

traces d'organifation. 

• Mais fur tous les points qui tiennent a Thiftoire du globe la 

fcience ne fait que des pas bien lents. Avant qu'on aif pu admettre 

une thEorie raifohnable fur une matiere qui demandoit une longue 

fuite d'obfervations, on croyoit implicitement que les bitumes etoient 

dus aux exhalaifpns de la terre, que Teiement terreux feul Etoit le 

principe de leur formation, et qu'ils Etbient a la terre et aux autres 

mineraux ce que Thuile effentielle, Fhuile par expreffion font aux 

vEgEtaux et la graiffe aux animaux,^ 

Oir 



w Exttafuous FoJjiU. g^ 

On n'a p«s tard^ a cftimer a fa jufte valeur cette opinion finguliire. 
XTn iibul raiibnQement fuffifoit pour en d^voiler le ridicule. L'huile 
<(t un produit de rorganifation : les corps priv^ d'organifation ne 
pouvoient done entrer pour rien dans leur fcM-mation ; audi s^eft-on 
accordei regarder le detritus des corps organifes enfevelis dans la terre 
par des caufes ^loign^es^ comme iXsxit la vraie matrice des bitumes 
fees et liquides^ en admettant n^anmoinsy que les principes de ces 
corps organifiis peuvent prendre, par la feule influence des vapeurs 
min^raleS) des carafi^es qui s*61oignent plus ou moins de la nature 
des fubftances prodiidhices; 

Ce font ces variety obierv^es.dans la nature des produits analy- 
tiques des bitumes, charbons fic^les, 6cc. qui fervent debafe i Thy- 
pothefe adoptee par Mrs. Parmentier, de Fourcroi et autres natura- 
liftes. Suivant cette hypothefe les animaux ont autant et peut-Stre 
HiSme plus contribue a la formation des mati&res bitumineufes que les 
Y^^aux. Les argumens qu'on oppofe en preuves font, que Ton 
trouve firequemment fur les premieres couches qui recouvrent les 
filons de charbon foflile, des d6pouilles d*animaux inarins, et que 
ces d^pouilles y font, plus abondantes que les d6bris de v6g6taux, 

Mais ces argumens ne font pas d'un auiii grand poids qu'on pour- 
roit, peut-etre^fe le figurer, (i Ton fait attention a la nature de cesd6- 
pouilles et aux efpices de coquillages qui s'y rencontrent. Ce font 
des univalves, bivalves, et multivalves, de grandeur ordinaire, et fai- 
fant. partie des bancs calcaires dont Taccumulation paroit poflerieure 
acelledes veg^taux/puifqtfon les retrouve dans la continuation des 
bancs, et dans des directions oppofees a celles des filons de houiile. 
Rarement, tr^s rarement rencontre-t*on des fragmens de ces grands 
oiTemens de c6tac6es qui, abondants en huile, pourfoient juftificr 
rhypothefe en empruntant les carafteres de la probabilite. 

Quand les meditations les plus profondes fur cette partie de Thif- 
toire naturelle auroient refuf<6 a la fagacit6 des obfervateurs la demon- 

I 2 ftratioa 



to M. TiNGRY^j Obfervatims 

firation des preuves tiroes de la feule mfpe^tioii des charbons fofliles^ 
pour faire d6pendre leur formation des feuls v^g^aux, il ne faudroit^ 
pour s'en convaincre, que fe repr^fenter ce qui doit fe paffer dans^une 
revolution telle que le c61ebre Pallas la fuppofe. Les debris de la 
furfacedu globe, ces forSts immenfea arrach^es deleur fol par la ra- 
pidity et la maffe des courants, confondues et entrain^es avec les ani- 
maux raarins et terreftres, ontdu occuper les.bas-fbnds et s'y pr^i- 
piter dans Tordre de leur pefanteur fpecifique. Les grands v6getaux 
ont fans doute conftitue ies lits inferieurs, ou garni les bords de la men 
Les teftacees comme plus legers, ainii que les pierres roulebs et les 
fabks ont forme les lits fuperieurs. Ces demiers lits peuvent etre 
contemporains ou pofterieurs, et tenir par cela m^e a des epoques 
difiierentes : mais, dans tout 6tat de caufe, ii les teftac6es fe font 
confervas, Timmenfe groffeur des citac^es, et lafolidit^ de leur. par- 
ties olleufes devoient auffi contribuer a leur confervation : il feroit 
done tres-aife d'en rencontrer des indices ; mais ii on en trouve, ils 
font fi rares qu*ils ne peuvent gucres balancer la th^orie qui repre* 
fente ks v^etaux comme etant les principaux mat^riaux de& 
houillesy charbons foffiles, kc. 

Cependant, quoiqu'il n*y ait aucune preuve apparentc que les ani- 
maux ayent concouru a la formation des bitumes, il feroit abufif d'en 
rejetter la ppffibilite. lis peuvent bien y avoir part dans.certains cir- 
coaftanees : peut-8tre meme auroit-on quelque raifon de regarder 
Tafphalte comme bitume nuxte, fty pour fe determiner, on s'etayoit 
des argument tires de fon analyfe ; nous, p^ons neanmoins que ces 
cas doiyeat £tre tres bornes. 

Mais par quelle puiiTance, par quel agent les corps organiques, en- 
fouis par une caufe quelconque^ fe trouvent-ils reduits a cet etat cfe 
duret^y de glutinofite ou de liquidite qui cara£berifent les houilles,, 
k malte, k bitume et ks huiles de petrole? On ne pent voir ici que 
Teflfet des d^ompofitiops fpontan6es et des nouvelks combinaifons 

operee 



on Extraneous FoJfUu 6 f 

operees par les vapeurs mini^Mdes et furtout par Ta pr^fence d*une 
certaine quantity d'eau. Ces di6bris ainfi renferm^s dans le fein de la 
terre par raccumulation fimultanee ou fucceflive des terres^ des 
pierres et des coquillages, auront i^to\rji des changemens en rai- 
fon cc»Bpof6e de leur mafTe^ de la nature de leurs principes et de la 
qiaantite dVan dont ils font p^ndtr^s. A ces caufes il s'en peut^tre 
joint d^autres qui nous font inconues, mais dont I'effet aura 6t6 plus 
ou moins prompt et dont les r6fultats font, que ces matieres, ramollies 
par Teauy fubi£fent pendant la revolution des fiecles, et dans le iilence 
de la nature, une analyfe comparable a celle qui a lieu dans des vaifr 
faux fermes; qu'elles s'6chaufFent par Teffet des d^cpmpofitions 
kntes et des nouvelles combinaifons, et fe reduifent en une matiere 
charbonneufe qui ofFre fouvent la forme entiere ou, au moins^ des in- 
dices marqu6s des corps organif(6s. Cette (iraple carbonification ne 
peut 6tre vraifemblablement attendue que dans les cas ovr la maife des 
matieres combuftibles n'eft pas trop confiderable *. II n'eft pas rare 
de rencontrer a quelque diftance des filons de grands vegetaux qui 
confervent leur forme ext6rieure, parcequ'ils ont 6te f(6pares de la 
maffe : pourTordinaire ils font min6ralifes^. 

On peut raifonnablement conje6turer que les debris de vegetaux, 
r^unis en plus grandes maffes, et expofts a Taftion des combinaifons 
particulieres qui donnent la chaleur a eertaines eaux thermales, ou 
enfin a I'influence des foyers volcaniques voifins, fubiffent une vraie 
diftillation, dont les produits, entraines par Teau qui s'bppofe a leur 
decompofition, paroiffent a la furface de la terre fous I'^tat de 
naphte- 

* La prefence d'une mine de fer diviiee ou fa formation locale accelerent fans doute 
cette operation de la Nature. Le Derbyfhire fournit un melange de fer et de manganaife 
qui prend feu fpontan^ment lorfqu'on le detrempe avec de Thuile de lin. Aux caiifes admifes 
paries phyficiens pour expliquer les inflammations fouterraines on pourroit peut-etre ajouter 
celle deseilets reAiltants d'un melange naturel d-huile depetrole avec une mine de fer ana* 
logue a celle du Derb]ihine* 

Dans 



6a M. TingryV Obfefvaiiom 

Dans d'autres circonftances ces m^mes Imiles d6tach6es deslxm 
par leur d^compofition fpontan^e, s*infiltrent infenriblement dans 
des couches de fable et d'argille, et donneht origincaux houilles 
feches et aux fchiftiesijitumineux. Eiitfin, dans d'autres circonftances 
encore etqui ne feroient qu'une fuite des pr6c6dente8, ces huiles ra- 
maflees dans les fciffures interieures de la terre jr ont pris la confif- 
tence qu'on remarque a la poix min^rale. 

Les m^itations lee plus ftrieufes fur Torigine des charbons foflilet 
et des matieres»qui leur font anak^es ou identiques ne peuvent 
gucres difpofer le naturaUfte a des opinions contraires a la doarine 
qui nous rcpr^fente les v^getaux comme les materiaux des charbons 
foffiles, &c. Le concours des animaux doit y avoir €u peu d'influ- 
ence, parceque fcurdifperfion a du s'oppofer a cette op^tioa fe- 
condaire de la Nature ; la condition eflentielle pour la bituminifatioa 
^tant que l6s corps qui y font deftin^s faffent mafle. Par cette difper- 
lion les corps fe deflechent ou fe min^ralifent. En effet les teftac^es 
qui rempliffent ou qui conftituent les couches fup^rieures qui recou- 
vrent certains filons ne contiennent r ien de charbonneux, parceque 
la mati^re animale ne faifoit point mafle ; et dans les cas ah les 
grands c^tac^es auroient contribu^ a la formation des filons combuf- 
tibles, la pr6fence de leurs oflemens, qui devoient s*y conferver auffi 
bien que les d^pouilles des teftac^es, feroit un temoignage qui pro- 
nonceroit fur la queftion. 

Nous croyons d'ailleurs que quand il fe prSfenteroit quelques faits 
en faveur de la nouvelle hypothefe, les reflexions particulidres qui en 
feroient la fuite ne pourroient influer que tr^s foiblement furl'opi- 
nion g^n^rale, par cette feule confid^ration, que les animaux marins 
et terreflres ne peuvent jamais balancer, par leur effet fuppof^ 
Timmenfe quantity de veg6taux entrain^s et engloutis par les 
convulfions de la terre. 

Les obfervations que j'ai faites dans les mines de houille de la Ta- 
rentaife ainfi que dans quelques mines de France et de Suiffe ne m'ont 

pr^fent^ 



on ExfrofteoM Fo/JSs^ 63 

friknti aucun hit coincidant avec I'hypoth^fe Francoife* : dans 
toutes ces niine» j'ai apper9ii des d^pouilles de teftac^es^ comme 
cames^ peigne% moules^ gryphites^ huitres> t6r6bratules, &c. renfer- 
in6e8 dan» les couches fup6rieures des filons et m^me dans le corps 
de la montagne ; mais je n'y ai vu aucune de ces d6pouilles animales 
ayant des indices de bituminifation^ Les debris de v^g^taux font 
plus ou moins fenfibles dans- la made m^medu charbon. 

Si dans ces fecherches particuli&es il ne s'eft prdTentd que 
quelques fragmens appartenant a la clafle des v^g^taux^ celles que je 
yiens de faire dans de nouveaux filons ouverts depuispeu en Savoye 
ont 6t6 plus heureufes. Les plantes enfouis y font carbonifii6es ians 
avoir rien pexdu de leur forme organique. Deplus> les 6chantillons 
que j'en ai tireaconfirment une opinion qu'on doit a la fagacit6 du c6^ 
Ubre B^nard de Juffieu, retativement aux empreintes v6g^tales et 
aux infedtes qu'on trouve dans certaines mines d'Europe ; c'efl que 
leurs analc^ues appartiennent a ITnde et a rAm^rique. 
- Ces filons de houille ont 6t6 apper9us un peu au-deffus de Ta-- 
ninge^ bourgde la province deFaucignien Savoye.- lis font ouverts 
fur les ftanos d'un torrent quidefcend des montagnes d'Abondance, 
et qui^ apres avoir traverfe le bourg, verfe fes eaux dans le GifFre.^ 
Leur elevation au-deflus du lacde Geneve eft de 16& toifes, fuivant 
les mefures prifes. par M. le Prof. Pi6tet. C eft dans les d^bkis du 
chapeau des filons que j*ai trouve les empreintes carbonifites dont je 
donne ici la defcription, J'en enverrai des^^chantillons a la pre- 
miere occafion. 

* Si la fubftsince ammaleavoitpu^influer (fune maniere fenfible Air la formation des* 
charbons fofEles, c'eft dans ces mafles enormes de coquillages alteres ou detruits qui confti- 
taent les montagnes de St. Pierre, pres de Maftricht, ainfi que dans les immenfes falunieres 
dela France que nous en devrions chercher les preuVes les moins equivoques. Cependant. 
il ne s^trouve pas de charbon foffile } et s'il s'en rencontre, on y reconnoit bientot les traces 
de Torganifation vegetale* 

2: La 



64 M. TiVGRY^s Olfervathns 

La mohtagne que recele ces filons eft du genre des calcaires ; mais 
elle renferme des melanges de pierres que les boraes de cesobfenra- 
tions ne permettent pas de d^crire, et que le c61cbre litbologifte Genei* 
vois mettra fans doute a la fuite de fes pr^cieufes obfervations fur les 
parties compofantes de nos montagnes. 

I. Tron^on d'un grand rofeau carbonifie, de 4 pouces de dia- 
metre et dont les fillons int6rieurs font imprimis dans le noyau 
pierrdux. On y remarque quatre articulations, dont les lames ren- 
trantes, egalement carboniii6es, fe prolongent affez avant dans Tinte- 
rieur du noyau et femble le divifer en autant de parties. Ce noyauy 
qui eft comprim/6 par Teffet de la pefanteur des couches fup^rieures, 
eft un melange d'argille durcie, de fable et de mica blanc. 

2* Une portion d*une large feuille carbonifi^e appartenaht,.fans 
doute, a Tefpece de rofeau d^crit ci-defTus, et dont les nervures font 
fbrtement exprim^es* Cette feuille, dont je crois pou voir determiner 
toute la largeur, a raifon de la depreffion des deux bords, a fix pouces 
de diametre. Sa longueur eft ind^terminee, le morcean que je pof- 
fede n'ayant qu'un pied de longueur fans indiquer cette decroiffance 
qui conduit a Yapex. La bafe de la pierre eft de la mSme efpece que 
la pr^c^ente, et prefente affez le cara6tdre de celles que le c^lebre 
Kirwan defigne fous le nom dc Kil/a. 

3* Des lames d*un fchifte noir mel6 de calcaire, fur lefquelles on 
voit de larges feuilles de rofeaux et d'autres feuilles de la m^me fa- 
niille, mais plus etroites ; des varietes de fougeres ; des portions ine- 
gales de longs p6dicules* Une partie de ccs lames n'offre que dts em- 
preintes ordinaires, tandis que d*autres echantillons les prefentent en- 
tierement carbonifi^es et entieres. On y diftingue auffi Yeqwfetum et 
une efpece de chara. 

4. D'autres empreintes de feuilles de rofeaux 6galement carbonifi^es 
et mineralifees par des pyrites martiales en lames fuperficielles fur 
une gangue de gres fchifteux. 

5. D'autres 



en Extraneous Fqffils. 65 

« 

5* D'autres fcuillets fchifteux noirs, avec quelqucs unes ^cs em- 
preintes pr^ccdentcs confondues avec des follioles en apparence reni- 
formes ct les p^dicules defignes (N^* 3.) Quelquefois Tunion de ces 
p6dicules eft tellement difpofee a Tegard de ces follioles qu'on feroit 
tente de les regarder comme leur appartenant. 

La premiere id6e que pr6fente Tafpeft de ces follioles, c*eft 
qu'elles ont iti fournies par YOfmunda regalis ; mais la nervure de 
fes feuilles qui eft plus apparente que dans nos fchiftes, et qui, outre 
cela, fe termine par un bord ferri qu on ne voit pas dans nos em- 
preintes, augmentoit nos incertitudes fur leur veritable efpece. Un feul 
morceau qui m'eft tombe fous la main, et qui montre huit a dix folli- 
oles oppofees et attachees a leur p^dicule commun, nous a d^couvert 
V^yplenium nodofum^frondibus pinnatis^ pinnis oppofitis^ lanceolatis^ integerri^ 
misy de Linne- G'eft la Filix latifolia nodofa de Plumier, Plantes d'Arae- 
rique, p. 4. tab. 6. 

Cette plante eft abfolument etrangere a notre climat, et elle ne 
croit que dans TAmerique Meridionale. II en eft de meme de 
quelques foug^res et de nos feuilles de grands rofeaux, dont on ne 
trouve point les analogues dans les endroits ou on les decouvre. 

6. Je peux joindre k la defcription de ces echantillons celle d'un 
morceau deboisp6trifie que j*ai ramaffe dans les environs d'Annecy, 
petite ville de Savoye. La matiere lapidifique eft de nature quart- 
zeufe ; et elle eft tellement diftribuee que la contexture du bois n*eft 
nuUement alteree dans fa forme. Ge morceau a cela d^intereflant 
qu'une partie eft convertie en vrai charbon foffile tres-noir, luifant, 
et ayant en un mot tous les carafteres qui le fpecifient. Ce charbon, 
divif(6 par baguettes qui fuivent la dire6lion des fils du bois, eft telle- 
ment contigu a la maffe lapidifiee, que le paffage du charbon a la 
pierre eft marque par des nuances tres-fenfibles dans fa durete et dans 
fa couleur, qui fe confondent enfin avec celles de la pierre. A Tune 
des extr6mites du morceau on obferve une belle criftallifation de 
fpath pefant en lames rhomboidales affez tranfparentes. 

K Quelqu'ifolees 



66 M. TinoryV Obfervations on Extraneous Fqffils. 

Quelqu'ifol6es que paroiffent ces obfervations, nous avons n^an->* 
moins efper6 qu'elles pouvoient etre confignees dans le dep6t dcs 
materiaux qui peuvent feuls prononcer fur les cataftrophes qui ont 
tourmcntc notre globe, et fur la nature* des fubftances qui femblent 
concourir le plus a la formation des charbons foflilesi des bitumest 
petroles, &c. 

Geneve, le 26 Avril 1788, 



( 67 ) 



III. Obfervatkns on the Ph^Una Bombyx Lubricipeda of LinneuSj and 
fome other Moths allied to it. By T^homas Marjham^ Efq. Secretary to 
the Linnean Society. 

Read Augujl 5, 1788. 

WITH a view to promote the interefts of that fciencc which 
we profefs to cultivate, I take the Uberty of offering to the 
confideration of the Linnean Society a few remarks, made with a 
defire of corre£ling an error into which the celebrated Linneus has 
fallen in defcribing his Phalaena Bombyx Lubricipeda; which, 
although a very common infeft, has been by him confounded with 
three other fpecies ; an error in which he has been followed by Fa- 
bricius and others. But before we enter on this fubjeft, I cannot 
help expreffing a wifti, that entomology were more ftudied as a 
fcience ; from a convi6lion that many interefting obfervations and 
difcoveries have frequently been made, which are concealed, or 
totally loft, for want of a proper mode of communicating them to 
the public. Few of the Englifh names of infefts being generally 
known, and many of them very local indeed, fcarcely any two ob- 
fervers, who confine themfelves to thefe names, can always under- 
ftand each other. If the ftudy of infe6ls be of any utility, clearnefs 
and precifion in its purfuit are Well worthy our attention. To enu- 
merate the ufes of this ftudy, would be only to repeat what has been 
often faid before. Yet if the appearance of an harmlefs caterpillar 

K 2 io 



68 Mr. Marsham'j Obfervatlons 

in greater numbers than ufual could caufe fo ferious an alarm to the 
inhabitants of London and its environs, as happened in the year 
1782, when the churchwardens and overfeers of the neighbouring 
villages, after ordering rewards for collefting thefe caterpillars, at- 
tended to fee them burnt by bufhels; furely much praife was due to 
the author of that curious and well-timed Effay on the Brown-tail 
Moth, in which, by a circumftantial and faithful hiftory of the little 
innocent animal, he reftored tranquillity to a terrified multitude. 

It is from fuch accurate and critical inveftigations of the nature 
and oeconomy of thefe lower orders of animals, and a mutual com^ 
munication of our difcoveries, that we muft expe6l profit. For al- 
though the labours of an individual taken feparatcly may afford 
little; yet when colledted, compared, and digefted, they may very 
much enrich the general (lock of knowledge. Could we with certainty 
attain a true hiftory of the different ftates of each particular infe6t, 
we might be enabled to form a complete fyftem, and alfo a method of 
clafTification more natural, cafy, and lefs liable to error and confufidn 
than thofe now in ufe; but this, if ever accomplifhed, muft be a 
work of time. In the mean while let us try how much is to be 
gained from a careful attention to fpecific diftin6lions. It is abfo- 
lutely necefTary to confider the different ftates of the infeft, becaufe 
many fpecies that appear fimilar in their larvae are totally different 
in their perfe6t ftates, and vice verfa. Few people difcover any 
difference between the maggot of a nut and that of an apple; and 
yet there are fcarce any two infects more unlike when arrived at 
perfe6tion: the one a beautiful little moth, and the other a remark- 
able beetle of the genus Curculio. They are however eafily diftin- 
guiftied, even in their firft ftate, by an attentive obferver. 'An ento- 
mologift Ihould always endeavour to be acquainted with his infe6t 
in all its changes, as a good botanift always defires to know his plant 
in every ftage of its growth. . Varieties in the fame fpecies of infe6t 

are 



on the Fhdana Bombyx Lubricipeda ofLinneus^ &c. 69 

arc certainly not fo numerous as many have conjedtured ; for though 
Nature frequently fports in this way in the Lepidoptera Glafs, where 
we fee different markings and (hades of colour in the fame fpecies, 
as in Phal. Geom. Prunaria, Defoliaria, &c.; yet an accurate eye will 
foon diftinguifli fome conftant charafteriftic mark which never 
fails to run through and unite them: for example, the long comma- 
like mark in the firft inflance^ and the roundifh dark fpot in the 
fecond ; neither of which ever vary. The diftin6tion of fex is indeed 
varioufly marked^ and requires peculiar attention. Some larvae pro- 
duce winged males and apterous females, which are fo totally different 
in their appearance, that it would be impoffible to determine them 
to be the fame fpecies, if we were not acquainted with their hiftory. 
Some females again have fmall, or as it were only rudiments of, 
wings; and others differ from the males fo much in colour as not to ap- 
pear fimilar. In fome claffes the diftinftion is ftrongly marked by the 
antennae; in others one fex is furnifhed with horns, of which the 
other is deftitute. So that a confiderable degree of attention is requi- 
lite before we attempt to determine; and therefore thofe entomologifts 
are moft to be depended upon, who are at the pains to trace their in- 
feft through its different changes from the egg to its perfe6l (late; 
thus acquiring truth from the fountain head. And to fuch I would 
particularly recommend a fcientific arrangement, that their obfer- 
vations may be more diffufed, and become generally ufeful. In the 
courfe of my own obfervation, I have never feen moths bred from 
the fame eggs fo different as to be miftaken for diftin6t fpecies, ex- 
cept in the before-mentioned cafes, where the females were apterous, 
or differed from the males in the colour of their wings. In the latter 
inflance, indeed, the markings are generally fimilar in form, and only 
differ in fhade and colour. If we refle6t on the wonderful labours of 
the great Linneus, and the immenfe numbers of objects whi<^h he has 
arranged and defcribed, comprehending the three kingdoms of Nature, 

5 we 



70 Mr. MarshamV Obfervations 

we fhall not be furprifed that he has fometimes erred : ^^ bumanum efi 
errare^^ But our aftonifhment will be increafed when we carefully 
examine for ourfelves, and obferve how feldom he did fo. For we 
find, that feveral errors that have been imputed to him arife from 
the fimilarity of many fpecies to each other, and our not having feen 
the true fpecies of Linneus. The truth of this obfervation has been 
proved in many inftances, fince the arrival of his valuable cabinet 
in this country. Infers of various fpecies are fo nearly connected, 
that it is, as I have before obfcrved, impoffible to difcriminate them 
without attending to their different dates : and this could never be 
expected from a man who was defcribing all the animals on the 
habitable globe ; as in many cafes he was obliged to defcribe from 
bad fpecimens, and often to depend on the reprefentations of others. 
Many authors, fearful of multiplying fpecies, appear to have fallen 
into the contrary extreme; and Linneus himfelf has either confidered 
different Phalsenae in many inflances as the fame, or he was a flran- 
ger to many of the moft common in this country. I fhall however 
at prefent confine myfelf to his Phal. Bom. Lubricipeda and Men- 
dica, and hope that others will endeavour to make fimilar remarks 
on thofe fpecies that appear to be erroneoufly united. To render 
the matter as clear as pofTible, I have fubjoined a drawing of four 
different Phalaenae, that appear to have much affinity, in their three 
ftates, and have added a fpecific defcription of each, together with 
the fynonyms of various authors; by which it will appear how much 
they have been mifquoted and mifapplied, 

PHAL^NA BOMBYX. 

Erminea. Ttab. i.f.i. Cream Ermine. 
B. Alis albis pun6lis nigris fparfis, abdomine quinquefariam nigro 
pun6lato. 
Linn. Syjl. Nat. 829. 69. lubricipeda. Faun. Suec. 1 138. foem. 

Fab. 



on the Phalana Bomiyx Lubricipeda of Linneus^ &c. yr 

Fai. Syft. Ent. 576. 68. Sp. Inf. 190. 93. 

Gad. Inf. vol. I. tab. 23.^. 38. Lift. Gced. 96. Rai. Inf. J^. 195. 

n. 40. Jilbln. Inf. 24./. 36, g — k. Wilkes 20. /. 3 — 5. 
DeGeer. Inf. 1. 1. 11. f. S. Roef. Inf. 2. t.^6. Efper. torn. 3. tab. 66. 

fig. 6 — 10 Menthaftri. Harris Aur. pi. 38. g — b. Ernfl. 

Pap. d'Europe^ pi. 158. n. 204. 

Habitat in arboribus pomiferis, urtic^, atriplici, quercu. 
Expanfio alarum i unc. 6 lin. 
Defer ip. Femora^ praefertim antica, lanugine ferruginc^ veftita; 
Corpus album; AU adfperfae pun6tis nigris plurimis in fuperiorum 
paging fupcriore; Abdomen luteum quintuplici macularum nigra- 
rum ordine, quorum unus dorfalis, duo utrinque laterales — Ano 
albo quo certo certius, a Ph. lubricipeda difFert. 



LuBRiciPEDA. I'ab. i.f. 2. Cream Dot Stripe. 
B. Alis lutefcentibus pundlis nigris plerumque ordine oblique-tranf- 

verfo pofitis. 
Linn. Syf. Nat. 829. 69. fi. Faun. Suec. 1 138. mas. Fab. Syft. Ent. 

576. 68. Sp. Inf. 190. 93. 
Gced. Inf. vol. 1. 38. Liji. Gced. 93. Rai. Inf. 196. n. 155. 
MerianEur. 1. 1. 46. f. 6s» Alb. Inf. 24. f. '^$. a — d. Frifch. Inf. 3. /. 8. 

Ammiral. t. 6. 
DeGeer. Inf. 1. t. 11. f. y. Roef. Inf. 2. t. 47. fFilies 20. /. 3. — 6. 

Ejper. vol. 3. tab. 66. fg. 1 — 5. 
Harris Aur. pL 16. h — L Ernfl. Pap. d'Eur.pl. 157. n. 203. 

Expanfio alarum i unc. 6 lin. 
Defcrip. Variat colore alarum albido ct lutefcente. Maxime affinis 
Ermineas, a qu^ difFert pun6tis plerifque ferie obliqu^ pofitis ; 

quod 



yz Mr. MARSHA&^i Obfervattom 

# 

quod in ill^ omnino defidcratur — ^Anus variat pro re nata 
flavefccntior; neque unquam albus. 

Mendica. ^ab. !./• 3* Spotted Muflin. 
B. Alls mafculis fufcis obfcuris. | ^^^^^^^ nigro-punftato. 

foemineis nivcis pellucidis. J 

Linn. Syji. Nat. 822. 47. Faun. Suec. 1127. mas. Pet. Gaz. 

R^/. //ij/^ 196. j4n. 97. 6. foem. Reautn. Inf. 2. /. i.^. I— 9« 
j^^r. vo/. 3. /tf^. 42. /g". I — 9. -Hiirm Aur.pl. ^^. m. 

- y, , f Mas, I unc. I lin. 

Expanfio alarum < ^ 

'^ L Foem. i unc. 5 Im. 

Defcrip. Mas. Alae anticae fufcae, macule albidi, media, obfoleta, 
et punftis circiter 9 nigris, fparfis — pofticae concolores pun£tis 
4 feu 5 nigris marginem verfus. 

Focmina. Alae omnes pellucidae, fuperiorcs punftis circiter 9 nigris, 
fparfis; inferiores circiter 7, marginaiibus. 

In utrique antennae nigrae, femora lutea. 

Papyratia. Tab. i.f. 4. fFater Ermtne. 
B. Alis niveis, punftis ad apicem nigris, abdomine quinquefariam 
nigro pundtato. 

J/bln. Inf. i\.f. 2P* e — h. 

Expanfio alarum i unc. 6 lin. 
Defcrip. Maxime affinis Ph. Ermineae, at alie pundlis folummodo 
ad apicem circiter fex nigris ; fcilicet quatuor confertis in ipfo apice, 
longitudinaliter pofitis, et duobus intra haec tranfverfim dudis, 
diftantibus. Caput, thorax et abdomen ut in Ph. Erminea. 

Larva habitat in plantis aquaticis. 

Fig. I. 



on the Phalana Bombyx Lubricipeda o/Linneus^ &c. 73 

Fig% I. to which I have given the name of Erminea, appears to be 
the moth which Linneus defcribes in the Syft. Nat. as Lubrici- 
peda, and to that moth is the name affixed in his cabinet. In the 
Fauna Suecica the particular defcription is, " Mas alis flavefcentibus 
ordine oblique tranfverfo pun6lorum nigrorum,*' which is an exaft 
defcription of fig. 2. to which I have retained the name of Lubrici- 
peda ; not only becaufe that name, taken from the motion of the 
caterpillar, agrees better with this fpecies than the other, but becaufe 
every author who has figured it fince Linneus has conftantly fo ap- 
plied it, though they have given different names to fig. i. Notwith- 
(landing Linneus has united thefe two fpecies of Phalaena, and men- 
tioned them as male and female of each other, it is but juflice to ob- 
. ferve, that it appears done contrary to his own opinion ; for, in quoting 
the fynonyms of Wilkes and Roefel^ he makes one a variety at leaft, 
with his ufual mark /3, and then adds, ^* Varietatem j8 non dift'mc- 
tam efle fpeciem docuit De Geer.*' That accurate author has written 
a long paper upon the fubje£t of thefe moths, in which he has endea- 
voured to prove that thefe two fpecies are the fame. He however 
defcribes but one kind of caterpillar, from which he had males yellow, 
and females white. This is in fome refpedts the fa6t; for the female 
of fig. a. is much lighter in colour than the male, and fometimes 
approaches to white. He refers to Reaumur to prove this affertion: 
but I am clearly convinced, that in the fecond memoir of the fecond 
volume of that illuftrious author, it is the Mendica of Linneus which 
is defcribed; and that the others are not mentioned. For with that 
moth his defcription perfe6lly coincides ; the female of which has 
fome refemblance to that of Erminea, as may be feen in fig. 3. ; but 
will be found totally diftindt, not only on account of the colour of 
its male, which, as Reaumur obferves, is the " colour of a rat," but 
alfo from the femi-tranfparency of the wings of the female, from 
whence Englilh colle6tors have named it the JpoiUd tnujlin. 

L Linneus 



74 Mr. MarshamV Obfervations 

Linneus himfelf appears to have been unacquainted with the 
female Mendica;. and the fpecimen of the male in his cabinet 
being a bad one, with the black fpots obliterated, he defcribes it, 
cinerea tota, femoribus luteis. This however is not the cafe; for 
the male is fpotted like the female, as may be feen in the drawing, 
fig, 3^ 6. There is indeed a bad fpecimen of the female of this 
moth in his cabinet; but it is placed indifcriminately with Lubri- 
cipeda and Erminea, I have endeavoured to give to each the 
fynonyms quoted by Liitneus ; to which I have added many that 
have been publifhed fmce his work was printed, omitting feveral 
that appeared only copies of Linneus. But even to them I am 
under fome obligation, as they have referred me to fynonyms 
♦ which others had overlooked. As the fimilarity of the colour in 
the bodies of the two firft fpecies appears to have been the occa- 
fion of their having been placed together, I have added another 
(vide fig, 4.), and named it Papyratia, exadly agreeing with them 
in that particular, although perfeftly diftin6t, as the larva and 
mode of living teftify. This moth is more rate than either of the 
others, and I find but one figure of it, which is in Albin, and 
well executed. As almoft every author who has given figures of 
the two firft infedls in their different ftates, makes them diftindl 
fpecies, it may with fome propriety be alked, where is the ne- 
ceffity of adducing further proof on the fubje6l? The neceflity will 
appear evident, when we confider, that as the Syftema Naturae 
and Fauna Suecica of Linneus, and Syft. Ent. of Fabricius, the 
moft valuable and ufeful fcientific books, agree in uniting them, 
and quote fuch refpeftable authority as Reaumur and De Geer ; 
and as I am ignorant of any fpecific defcriptions having been 
given, it appears abfolutely neceffary fot the young eritomologift 
to have them feparated and clearly diftinguifhed; and the more fo, 
as Ernft, in his admirable work, Papillom d' Europe^ after having 
5 taken 



/ 







Q.>^!^4^/af^a. 60. p'? 



r7m/?ze^L-. 



3 






I $ 








l/Z/i/r^/r U^. , J/r^?y/ra, 



ZimtTrans*. I, frrl.J. /?. TS . 



z 







Y /' 




^Uglljij^ 




Q-yiia/iVna ^y6./y^i^//H^f/^^ _ 



. 4(zo^Wr 7^ 



on the Phakena Bombyx Lubricipeda ofLinneus^ 0r. , 75 

taken great pains to prove them diftinft fpecies, and combating 
the objeftions of others^ adds, that in the midft of the different 
tcftimonies which appear fo contradiflory, he wifhes not to decide 
the queftion, but invites other naturalifts to raife them from the 
egg, and give the refult of their obfervations. 



L 2 IV. De/crip^ 



( 76 ) 



IV, Defcriptlons of four Species of Cypripediunty by Richard Anthony 
Salijburyy Efq. F. R. S. Fellow of the Linnean Society. 

Read QSloher 7, lySS* 

CYPRIPEDIORUM aliquorum icones necnon defcriptiones 
Societati Linneanas oblaturus, chara6terem effentialem hujus 
generis minime labio inferiori corollas calceiformi^ ix)tius autem 
ftru6tura genitalium conilare, quas in omnibus orchideis dillin- 
guendis maxim^ valent^ prasmittere vellem. 

CYPRIPEDIUM GALCEOLUS. t. 2. f. i. 

Cypripedium Calceolus. Linn. Sp. PL f. 1340. Calceolus, &c. 
Hall. Hiji. Helv. v. 2. n. 1300. /. 42. Calceolus marianus. Dod. 
Pempt. p. 180. p. 1, 2. 

Corolla labio fuperiore ovali concavo fubtus carini late canalicu- 
lata, inferiore petalis breviore compreffo. 

Sponte nafcentem in OJiro-Bothni^e fylvis abunde legit C. Linne — 
prope Bern declivibus montium umbrofis legit A. Haller — in Monte 
Saleve legit J. Ray — in Pedemontii fylvis legit C. AUioni. 

Floret fine Maii, Junio. 

Planta 8-10 pollicaris. Radix fufca, horizontalis, tuberofa — Fibrae 
craffae, fafciculatae— carnofa, perennis. Caulis viridis, ere6lus, fim- 
plex, teres^ articulatus, hirto-pubefcens, folidus, hcrbaceus, mar- 

cefcens. 



Mr. Salisbury'! Defcriptms^ &c. 77 

cefcens» Folia 5 vel 6, viridia, altema, feffilia, bafi amplexicaulia, 
patenti-recurva, lanceolata, integcrrima, obtufe acuminulata — Nervi 
parallel!, longitudinales, fupra depreffi — hirto-pubefcentia prxcipue 
fubtuS) paululum undulata, herbacea^ marcefcentia. Flores nu- 
tantes, folitarii, rarius duo. Pedunculus foliis brevior, c caulc 
continuatus, ftru6lura omnino fimilis. Bra^lea folitaria fub germine, 
ftru6lura foliorum fed minor, magifque ovato-lanceolata. Germen 
viride, incurvulum, angufte pyriforme, 6-angulum, hirto-pubefcens. 
Petala faturate fufca : fupremum ereflum^ infimum a:quale, depen- 
dens; ovato-lanceolata: lateralia mnlto anguftiora^ parum longiora^ 
patenti-deflexa, lineari-attenuata, bafi intus barbata : integerrima, 
obtufa, tcnuiffime hirto-pubefcentia praefertim extujs, tortuofa— 
Labium fuperius flavum maculis fufcis^ ultra lobos laterales flyli 
infertum, ellipticum, integerrimum, obtufum, utrinque laeve, fupra 
concavum^ fubtus caring late canaliculate. Labium inferius flavum, 
petalis brevius, calceiforme, compreffum, ore fuborbiculare, 6xtus 
Iseve, intus bafi barbatum lineis macularum fufcarum. Stylus 
flavus, laevis — Lobi ; laterales apice incurvuli, angufle cuneiformes, 
obtufi; medius oblongus, bafi latior, medio anguftatus, obtufus. 
Antherse flavae, paulo infra apicem loborum quibus multo latiores^ 
orbiculares, biloculares. Pollen flavum. Stigma pallide flavum, 
bafi triangulo umbilicatum, minute papillofum. 

a Labium fuperius. d Styli lobus terminalis. 

i " — inferius. e Antherse. 

c Styli lobi laterales. 

lifdem literis in omnibus tabulis notantur easdem partes. 

CYPRIPEDIUM PARVIFLORUM. t. a. f. 2. 
Helleborine Calceolus di6ta, mariana, caule foliofo, flore luteo 
minore* Plubi. MantiJ. p. loi. t. 418./ 2. pejfima. 

CoroU^ 



78 Mr. Sal is bur yV Defcriptions of 

Corolla labio fuperiore fagittxformi bad deflexo fubtus carina 
angufte canaliculate, inferiore petalis breviore compreffo. 

Sponte nafcentem in Virginid legit H. MarfhalL 

Floret fine Maii. 
Petala fordide viridia lineis macularum fcrruginearum : fupre- 
mum ereftum ; infimum paulo brevius, dependens ; ovato-lanceo- 
lata: lateralia multo anguftiora^ l-4ta parte longiora^ patenti- 
deflexa, lineari-attenuata, bafi intus barbata : integerrima, obtufa, 
tenuiflime hirto-pubefcentia prsefertim extus, tortuofa — ^Labium 
fuperius flavum maculis fufcis lobos laterales ftyli obducens bafi 
deflexum, late fagittaeforme, integerrimum, obtufum, utrinque Isevc, 
fupra verfus apicem concavum, fubtus caring angufie canaliculate — 
Labium inferius flavum maculis fufcis circa apicem, petalis brevius, 
calceiforme, compreflurti, ore fuborbiculare, extus Iseve, intus bafi 
barbatum. Stylus flavus — Lobi ; laterales apice ipfo leviflime incur- 
vuli, angufte cuneiformes, obtufi ; medius fenri-ellipticus, obtufus — 
laevis. Antherae flavae, infra apicem loborum quibus multo la- 
tiores, orbiculares, biloculares. Pollen flavum. Stigma flavum, bafi 
triangulo umbilicatum, minute papillofum, 

Herbi gaudet praecedentis, fed Folia remotiora et ovalia* 

CYPRIPEDIUM SPEG.TABILE* t. 3. f. 3. 

Helleborine flore majore purpureo, &c. Morif. Hift. v. 3. p. 488. 
f.\2. /. II. /I 17* pejjima. Helleborine Calceolus didla, mariana, 
flore gemello candido, venis purpureis ftriato. Plukn. Mantijf.p. loi. 
t. \\^. f 2>' peffima. 

Corolla labio fuperiore ovali bafi retufo concavo fubtus caring 
obtufi, inferiore petalis longiore groflb. 

Sponte nafcentem in Penjylvania fylvis legit I. Bartram. 
Floret fine Maii, Junio. 

* C. album, jftton Hort. Kew. V. 3. 303. 

Planta 



four Species of Cyprtpedlum. ' 79 

Planta pedalis, vel plus. Radix congenerum. Caulis pallidc 
viridis, ere6lus, fimplex, teres, articulatus, hirfutus, folidus, herba- 
ceus, marcefcens. Folia 6 vel 7, pallide viridia, alterna, feflilia, bafi 
amplexicaulia, patenti-recurva, ovali-lanceolata, integerrima, obtufe 
acuminulata— Nervi paralleli, longitudinales, fupra deprefli — hir- 
futa praefertim fubtus, paululum undulata, herbacea, marcefcentia. 
Flores, Braftea, Pedunculus, Germenque ut in Cypripedio Calceolo. 
Petala alba : fupremum ere6tum ; infimum paulo brevius, depen- 
dens; ovalia: lateralia longitudine fupremi, multo anguftiora, lineari- 
lanceolata, bafi intus barbata: integerrima, obtufa, hirto-pubef- 
centia praefertim extus, plana — Labium fuperius album maculis 
rubris, lobos laterales obducens, ovale, bafi retufum, integerrimum 
obtufum, utrinque laeve, fupra concaviufculum, fubtus carina obtufa 
— Labium inferius pallid? rofeum vittis faturatioribus, petalis longis, 
groffe calceiforme, ore tranfverfe ovale, extus laeve, intus bafi bar- 
batum lineis maculartim rubrarum. Stylus albus — Lobi; laterales 
recurvi, falcati, obtufi ; medius fuborbicularis, obtufiflimus, laevis. 
Anthcrae dilute flavaj, ovales, vix infra apicem loborum quibus 
parum latiores. Pollen fiavum. Stigma dilute flavum, bafi trian- 
gulo umbilicatum, minute papillofum. 

GYPRIPEDIUM HUMILE*. t. 3. f. 4. 

Calceolus flore maximo rubente, &c. Catejb. Htfi. Car. Append, p. 3. 
/. 3. mediocris. Helleborine Calceolus didta, mariana, foliis binis 
e radice ex adverfo prodeuntibus, &c. Pluht. Mantijf.p. loi, /. 418, 
f l.pejfima. 

Corolla labio fuperiore rhomboideo acuminato lateribus deflexo fub- 
tus carina anguftiffima obtufa, inferiore petalis longiore antice fiflb. 
Sponte nafcentem in Novd^Scoiid legit A. Menzies. 
Floret fine Maii, Junio* 

• C. acaule. jfiton Hort. JCw. F. 3. 303, 

Planta 



8o Mr. Salisbury^ Defcriptions^ &c. 

Planta 6-8 poUicaris. Radix congenerum. Folia duo, viridia, 
radicalia, oppofita, patentia, lanceolata, integerrima, obtufa — Nervi 
paralleli, longitudinales, fupra deprefli— utrinque hirto-pubefcentia, 
planiufcula herbacea, marcefcentia. Flores nutantes, folitarii. Pe- 
dunculus viridis, foliis faepe longior, crcdlus, fimplex, teres, hirto- 
pubefcens, folidus, herbaceus, marcefcens. . Bradea folitaria fub 
genuine, ftruftura foliorum fed longe minor et ovato-lanceolata. 
Gcrmen viride, breve incurvum, obfolete pyriforme 6-angulum, 
hirtx>-pubefcens. Petala pallide fufca: fnpremum ere6lum ; infi- 
mum aequale, dependens ; ovato-lanceolata : latcralia anguftiora 
pauloque longiora, patenti-deflexa, lineari-attenuata, latere inferiore 
bafi paululum auriculata, inferne intus barbata : integerrima, obtufa, 
utrinque hirto-pubefcentia, tortuofa — Labium fuperius pallide fuf- 
cum, ultra lobos laterales ftyli infertum, lateribus deflexum, verfus 
apicem paululum incurvum, rhomboideum, acuminatum, utrinque 
hirto-pubefcens,fubtus carina anguftiflima obtufa — Labium inferius 
purpureum vittis faturatioribus, petalis longis ; bafi redle deflexum, 
intus barbatum ; dein cxporre£lum, grofle calceiforme, ore antice 
fiffum, utrinque hirto-pubefcens. Stylus flavus— Lobi ; laterales 
apice ipfo laeviflime incurvuli, angufte cuneiformes, obtufi ; medius 
late cuneiformis bafi anguftiore, obtufus — hirto-pubefcens. Antherse 
flavae, lobis multo latiores, orbiculares, 2-loculares. Pollen flavum* 
Stigma dilute flavum, bafi longe attenuatum, triangulo umbilicatum, 
papillofum. 



Linn.Tfxtns. /. tal. 2.p,^C^ 





11 






1?*7 , \p ;{k 4' 



KMindsnjt^ ••^' 



1 



Ldnn.Tmns, I.fytl. 3. p, &0. '. 







t.^^fr/fi 



7^ -- 



t 8i ) 



V. Defcripiions of ten Species of Lichen colledled in the South of Europe. 
By James Edward Smithy M.D. F.R.S. Frefdent of the Linnean 

Society. 

Read November 4, 1788. 

!• Lichen exanthematicus. f. ^f 1. 

JLU% Leprofus cinereus, fcutellis minutiffimis carneis- immerfis in 
cruftae foveolis albis* Confer Lichenem 2077, ^078, Hall. Hiji. 

Habitat in rupibus calcareis Galliae auftralis, non longe ab 
Avenione. 

Crufta tenuiflima, vix palpabilis, cinerea, adfperfa pun6i:is 
albis, e foveolis parvis, integumento albo, rugofo, claulis, quo 
poftea e centro fe difpandente, fcutella prod it exigua, carneai 
proprio margine concolori inftru6la, in centro foveolae re- 
condita. His fcutellis a^tate diffilientibus, foveolae reftant 
albae, vacuse, et quafi ipfo lapide cxcavatae, ut in L. immerfo 
Weberi. 

2. L. gypfaceus. /. ^.f 2. 

L. cruftaceus lobatus; interne albus; fuperficie virenti> fcutellis 
difFormibus flavefcentibus. 

L. fragilis. Scop. Carn. No. 140Z, ut ex defcriptione patetj 
exclufo fynonymo Seguieri. 

L. pulmonarius, faxatilis, farinaceus, major, foliis crafTis fubro* 
tundis, e cinereo virefcentibus, inferne albis, receptaculis florum 
fubrufis. Mich. Nov. Gen. Plant. 94, /. 51. ord. 30./ i. 

M ' Habitae 



82 Dr. Smith*J Tftfcrt^tloni ^ 

Habitat in rupibus Monfpelii & Genuae. 

Crufta crafliffima, gypfacea, lobata, intus margineque albif- 
fima, fupra viridis. Scutellae numerofas, maghitudine & figura 
valde variantes, teftaceo flavefcentes, setate rimofae. Affinis 
L^ lentigeroy fed fpecie diftin6lus» 

3. L. tumidulus. /• ^.f. 3, 

Lt cruftaceus albus lobatus : lobis deflexis tumidis, tuberculis atris 
difFormibus. 

Habitat in fiffuris rupium Galliae auftralis, 

Crufta alba, lobata; lobi rotundati, valde deflexi, ut far6li vel 
inflati apparent, fupra minute tefrellatorimofi. Tubercula in 
interftitiis loborum, atra, irregularia. 

4. L. faxifragus. /. 4.^! 4. 

L* cruftaceus lobatus longiflime radicatus cajfius, tuberculis rubris. 
Habitat in fiffuris rupium Monfpelii. 

Radices albac, ramofae, in fiffuras rupium longiffimi de- 
fcendunt. Crufta lobita, fubfoliacea, crafliufcula, caefii vel 
glauci coloris. Tubercula qiagnitudine feminis Sinapios, rubra* 

5. L. chryfoleucus. t. /^f. ^. 

L* imbricatus, foliolis lobatis obtufis : fupra pallida fulphureis ; 
fubtus atro-viridibus, fcutellis aureis* 

Habitat in montis Ccnifii rupibus. 

Similis L. crajjb Hudfoni Fl. An. fed tenerior, magifque foli- 
aceus, neque fubtus albus. Singularis nempe eft color atro 
virens paginis inferioris foliolorum, fine ulla hirfutie vel pu- 
befcentia. Scutellae numerofae, aurese, margine foliis concolpri^ 
^ui poftea evanefcit, & inde fcutellae tubercula evadunt, 

c 6« L. 



ef ten Species of Lichen^ 83 

6. L. tiliaceus. 

L. imbricatus, foliolis finuatis laevibus cinereo albidis, fcutellis 
badiis margine albido laevi *. 

L. tiliaceus. Hoffman Fafc. 2. ex au6toritate D. Zeir. 

Habitat in corticibus olearum Gallo-provinciae et Genuac. 

Affinis L, faxatlU & omphalodiy fed differt quod foliola fupra 
glaberrima fuiit (minime fcabra, incana^ vel lacunofa), pallide 
caefia, nitida; fubtus vero, ut in 'L. faxatili^ atra et hirfpta. 
ScutellsB numerofiffimaB & frequentiflimae (nee rarae), badiae, 
nitidae, margine laevi, albo, bafi externe atrae & valde hirfutae, 
ut in affinibus. 

7. L. encauftus. /. 4.^! 6. 

L. imbricatus, foliolis linearibus dichotomis: fupra albis nitidis; 
fubtus nigris opacis, fcutellis badiis. 

Habitat in rupibus alpinis Sabaudiae. In fummitate montis 
Montanveri prope Chamonix. 

Frondes valde implexae, ramofiffimae, late difFufac, magis vel 
minus anguftae, marginibus fubrevolutis, fupra albae, nitidae, 
quafi encaufto ornatas^ apicibus fufcis; fubtus nigra, opaca?, 
apicibus pallidis. Scutell^e nitidae, fufcse, marginibus albis, 
aetate faepe lobatis. 

8. L. corrugatus. 

L. foliaceus repens lobatus viridis, fcutellis teftaceo-ferrugineis 
concavis extus rugofis folio concoloribus f. 

L. acetabulum. Necker Meth. Mufc. 94, nomen ineptum. 

L. pulmonarius arboreus e cinereo viridis. FailL Paris, 
t. 21. / 13- 

« L. quercifoHus. Jacq. Coll. V. 3. 127. /. 9. /. 2. fig. })ona, fed fynonyma omnino 
erronea. 
+ L, acetabulum. J^cq, ColL F. 3. 125. /. 9./. i. bona. 

M2 L. pul- 



84 D^* SmithV Defcriptions 

L. pulmonarius, infemc obfcurus, defuper e glauco fub- 
virefcens, receptaculis florum amplioribus ac den(ioribu$> atro 
fufcis. Mich. Nov. PL Gen. 90. /. 48, f. 2. 

Lichenoides acetabulis cutaneis & rugofis, D/V/. Mujc. 185. 
/. 24. f. 79. opt. 

Habitat in truncis arborum Gallias borealis. 

Foliaceus, late expanfus, ecortice parum elevatus, rugofus 
margine undulatus ; madidus faturate virens, fubtus puUus ; 
ficcus plumbeus. Scutellae numerofae, concavar, difco ferru- 
gineo vel pullo ; externe folio concolores, varieque corrugatae, 
vernicofaj, & faepe farinofae, quibus notis fpecies facile dig- 
nofcenda. 

9. L. faturninus. 

1j. foliaceus membranaceus lobatus atro-virens fubtus villofus pal- 
lidus, fcutellis atro-ferrugineis fparfis *. 

Habitat in truncis arborum ad ripas Rhodani prope Va- 
lentiam, & in Sabaudia. 

Simillimus L. cochleato Dickf. Fafc. fed difFert quod fubtus 
villofus, nee utrinque laevis eft. Folia ficca obfcure plumbea, 
villo albido. Scutellae numerofae, fparfae, atro ferrugineae, juniores 
marginatae, margine concolori, mox difco elcvato, margineque 
obliterato, in tubercula abeunt. 

10. L. cucuUatus. ^. 4./. 7. - , 

L. foliaceus ereftus laciniatus albus, fcutellis pofticis cucullatis 
fufcis. 

L. cucuUatus. Bellardi OJfervazioni Botaniche^ 54. 

An Dill. MuJc. t.2\.f. 56. B? 

An L. ochroleucus. . Lamarci^ Flo. Franc. V. !• 81 •' 



♦ L. faturninus, Dkkf. Crypt, fafc. %. ii. U 6,/. 8. 



Habitat 



^mn. Trans, I, txtb . •^.je?. d4 . 




cf tm Specks of Lichen. 85 

Habitat in ericetis alpinis Sabaudix. £x monte Ceniiio ad 
CL Bellardum mifi. 

Medius quafi inter L. tjlandicum & Lt nhalem^^b utrifquc 
vero diflinftiffimus. Frons ere£la, alba, glaberrima, multi- 
fido laciniata, marginibus involutis, ut canaliculata, & faepe 
tubulofa, evadit, Laciniae fruftiferae ampliatae, rugofae, pof- 
tice cucullatae, Scutellae intra cucullum, fufcas. 

A Dillenio, qui fmdlificationem non vidit, cum L. nha/i 
confundi videtur, uti etiam ih Ehrharto in Phytophylacio, 
in meo faltem exemplario. Sed quantum fcutellis difFert ab 
illo, fatis patet ex. icone in Flora Lapponica, ubi pelta Lichenis 
nivalis depingitur. 



( 86 ) 



VI. Some Obfervaiions on the Natural Hlflory of the CurcuUo Lapathi 
and Silpha grifea. By Mr. William Curtis ^ Fellow of the Linnean 
Society. 

Read November 4, lySS, 

SEVERAL fpecies of willow, particularly three of the moft 
ufeful and ornamental, the alba, the fragills^ and the babylonicay 
are well known to be fubje6J: to the depredations of numerous 
infe6ls, and of the larvae of the Phalcena Cojfus in particular, who 
feed on the fubftance of the wood, and prove uncommonly deftruc- 
tive to the latter fpecies ; for as the larvae in each tree are generally 
numerous, in the courfe of a few years they deftroy fo much of the 
trunk,, that the firft violent gale of wind blows down the tree. So 
infefted are the weeping willows in many nurferies with thefe in- 
fers, that there is fcarcely one in ten to be fele6ted free from them. 
The willows are infefted alfo in the fame way with the larvae of the 
Cerambyx mofchatus ; and we have now the honour of laying before 
the Linnean Society fome account of the hiftory of a fpecies of 
Curculioj which was little fufpefted of committing fimilar depreda- 
tions, but which in proportion to its fize is no lefs deftru6live; 
as alfo fome obfervations on the hiftory of a fpecies of Silpha^ dif 
covered in inveftigating the economy of the CurcuUo. 

In the beginning of June 1780 I obferved a young tree of the 

Sallx 



Mr. Curtis*/ Obfervations^ &c. 87 

Salix vtminalisj which had been planted in my garden two years, and 
which was now about fix inches in diameter, throwing out from 
various parts of its trunk a fubftance fomewhat refembling faw- 
duft, which fell at its bafe in no inconfiderable quantity. This fub- 
ftance, on a clofer examination, was found to proceed from holes 
about the fize of a goofe quill, penetrating deeply into the fub- 
ftance of the wood, obliquely upwards and downwards. On its firft 
coming out it appeared of the colour of the wood, and was moift; 
as it grew dry it became of a browner colour. The whole of the 
trunk where this internal operation was going forward emitted a 
fmell fomewhat like beer in a ftate of fermentation ; and various 
infefts allured thereby fettled on the tree, and feemed eagerly to 
imbibe nourilhment from it : among others the Papilio AtaJanta^ 
Scarabaus auratuSf Apis mellifera, Cantharh livida^ with various fpecies 
of Mufae^ were frequent attendants. On the tenth of June I 
took the Cerambyx mofchatus on the tnmk, but faw only one. 

Thefe extraordinary appearances ftrongly excited my curiofity; 
I therefore often vifited the tree, and, on minutely examining its 
bark, I difcovered feveral fmall coleopterous infe6ls in its crevices, 
which at firft, from their great fimilitude, I miftook for the Citnex 
ledlularius : a more clofe infpeftion, however, foon convinced me 
that it was a Silpha ; and on turning to the Sj^/iema Naturae of Lin- 
neus, I had little doubt but it was his Silpha grifea. On examinino- 
the faw-duft-like fubftance in its moift and fermenting ftate, I dif- 
covered many fmall larvae feeding amongft it, which when fully 
grown were about a barley-corn in length ; the body fomewhat 
flattened, of a dirty white colour, having fix fore feet and two 
hind ones ; the head of a brightifli brown colour, furniftied with 
two jaws ; each joint of the body projecting at the fides, fo as to give 
it a kind of ferrated appearance ; the neck of a blackifli brown 
colour, with two or more rows of fmall dots running therefrom 

down 



88 Mr. C0RTisV Obfervatkns en the 

down the back to the tail, which was terminated by four fmall 
fetac, turning a little upwards, the two lowermoft by much the 
longeft. The larvae were generally found in confiderable numbers 
together, and on being difturbed ran pretty brifkly. From their fize> 
and other concurring circumftances, I had no doubt but they were 
the larvae of the Silpba^ feeding on the fpoils of the tree's grand 
internal enemy ; which being determined to get a fight of^ 1 ordered 
my fervant with a hatchet to chop out a piece of the tree, fuf- 
ficient for the difcovciy; when the large maggots reprefented 
'^^- 5* /• I' ^' were found in perpendicularly cylindrical cavities, 
corroding the fubftance of the wood : they were about twice or 
thrice as large as the maggot of the hazel nut, and very much re- 
fembling it in fhape, of a yellowilli white colour, grofs body, ap- 
parently without any legs, having a fhining head of a cheftnut 
colour, armed with ftrong jaws. 

I put feveral of thefe, June 27th, into a pan, with fome fragments 
of the wood ; but, the chips becoming dry, they relinquifhed their 
abode and pined away, 

I.fhould have taken other fteps to have reared them, had I not 
been certain that my tree ftill contained great numbers of them : 
in hopes therefore of finding them in their pupa ftate, I waited 
till the 25th of July, when, on cutting out a piece more of the tree> 
my expeftations were anfwered ; I difcovered feveral of them, as 
reprefented at fg. 3 : at the fame time I found on the bark of the 
tree the Gurculio Lapathi, fee^. 4, 5 ; and, on cutting farther into 
the tree, I found the fame fpecies juft bfoke forth from its pupa. 

I was then fatisfied that all the mifchief which had been done 
to the tree was efFe6led by this fpecies of Curculio^ and which I had 
fome years before found in great plenty on the leaves of the fame 
fpecies of Salix. Having fucceeded in difcovering the principal cir- 
cumftancc of the hiftory of this infe6t, I was not a little anxious 

to 



Zmn.iymy. I. tub .o.p.SG. 










Cm^tcic/^i? 




^,'<' /f,^y/c/j,^. f „ ' 



Curculio Lapathi and Stlpha grifea. 89 

to find the Silpha in its pupa ftate ; and after fearching for it in 
vain, on and under the bark of the tree, I found plenty of them 
under the furface of the ground, among the moift earth and faw-* 
duft, and feveral alfo of the fame infeft in its perfe6t ftate. 

I had no opportunity of obferving in what manner the female 
Curculio depofited its eggs ; moft probably they are laid under the 
bark at firft, or in fome crack or crevice of the tree, arifing from an 
injury : at leaft that is the mode in which the female Phalana Cojfus 
depofits its eggs, and to prevent which we cannot be too much on 
our guard ; for, if the larvae have once entered the tree, we fhall in 
vain feek a remedy. If the tree therefore fuftain any injury from 
lopping, or from any . other caufe, a piece of canvas, fpread over 
with fome adhefive refinous fubftance, fhould be applied ; or the 
nurferyman may find his account in matting over the bodies of his 
young trees, during the months of June and July, when the moth 
comes out of its chryfalis ; or perhaps bruftiing them over at that 
period with fome of the new tar extra6ted from fea coal, might 
anfwer the fame ufeful purpofe. 

EXPLANATION OF TAB. 5. 

. Fig. I, 2. Larva of Curculio Lapathi. 

3. Pupa of ditto. 

4, 5. The fame infeft in its perfedl ftate* 

6. Larvae of Silpha grifea. 

7. One of the fame larvae magnified. 

8. Pupa of ditto. 

^. Pupa magnified. * 

10. The perfc6t infeft. 

11. Ditto magnified. 



N VIL De^ 



( 90 ) 



VII. Defcription of the Stylephorus chordatusy a newjijh^ iy George Shanv^ 
M. D. F. IL S. Fellow of the Linnean Society. 

Read December 2, 17S8. 

HAVING lately had an opportunity of examining a very un- 
common and curious fifh, which, fo far as I am able to judge, 
conftitutes a new genus, I was induced to compofe a fhort defcrip- 
tion of it ; which, together with a figure drawn of the natural 
fize, will I hope be fufficient to give a clear idea of fo Angular an 
animal. The generic charafters may I think be defcribed thus: 

OcuLi pedunculati (feu cylindro craflb brevi impofiti). 
Rostrum produftum, furfum fpedtans, verfus caput membrana 

interjefta retraftile. 
Os terminale, edentulum ? 
Branchije trium parium fub jugulo fitae. 
PiNNiE pe£torales parvae; dorfalis longitudine dorfij 
Gaudalis brevis, radiato-fpinofa* 
Corpus longiffimum, compreiTum. 

The head of this extraordinary animal bears fome diftafot refem- 
blance to that of the genus Syngnathus, and its true ftru^ture 
cannot fo eafily be defcribed in words as conceived by the figure. 

The 



Dr. ShawV Defcription of the Stylephorus. 91 

The roftrum, or narrow part which is terminated by the mouth, is 
connedted to the back part of the head by a flexible leathery 
duplicature, which permits it either to be extended in fuch a manner 
that the mouth points dire6lly upwards, or to fall back fo as to be 
received into a fort of cafe, formed by the upper part of the head. 
On the, top of the head are placed the eyes, which are of a form 
very nearly approaching to thofe of the genus Cancer, except that 
the columns, or parts on which each eye is placed, are much 
broader or thicker than in that genus. They are alfo placed clofe 
to each other ; and the outward furface of the eye, when magnified* 
does not fhew the leaft appearance of a reticulated ftru6lure. 
The colour of the eyes, as well as of the columns on which they 
(land, is a clear cheftnut brown, with a fort of coppery glofs. 
Below the head, on each fide, is a confiderable compreffed femi- 
circular fpace, the fore part of which is bounded by the covering of 
the gills, which feems to confift of a fingle membrane of a mode- 
rately ftrong nature. Beneath this, on each fide, are three fmall 
pair of branchiae. The body is extremely long, and compreffed 
very much, and gradually diminifhes as it approaches the tail, which 
terminates in a procefs or firing of an enormous length, and finilhes 
in a very fine point. This, firing, or caudal procefs, feems to be 
ftrengthened thr6ughout its whole length, or at leafl as far as the 
eye can trace it, by a fort of double fibre or internal part. The 
perioral fins are very fmall, and fituated almofl immediately behind 
the cavity on each fide the thorax. The dorfal fin, which is of a 
thin and foft nature, runs ivova the head to within about an inch 
and a half of the tail, when it feems fuddenly to terminate, and a 
bare fpace is left of about a quarter of an inch ; I am however not 
altogether without my doubts whether it might not in the living 
animal have run on quite to the tail, and whether the fpecimen 
might not have received fome injury in that part. From this place 

N 2 com- 



9Z Dr. Shaw^j Defcriptjon of the Stykpborus. 

V 

commences a fmaller fin, which conftitutes part of the caudal one. 
The caudal fin itfelf is furniflied with five remarkable fpines, the 
roots or originations of which may be traced to fome depth in the 
thin part of the tail. The general colour of this fifli is a rich 
filver, except on the flexible part belonging to the roftrum, which 
is of a deep brown ; the fins and caudal procefs are alfo^brown^ 
but not fo deep as the part juft mentioned. There is no appearance 
of fcales on this fifh. It fhould be placed in the firft order of the 
Linnean diftribution of Filh, or Apodes, from its having no ventral 
fins. So remarkable is the appearance of the head, that I almoft 
doubted whether it might not with greater propriety be placed 
amongfl: the nantes than the fifties, properly fo called ; till on con- 
fidering the appearance of the branchise, and fome other particulars 
relative to the general form of the animal, I was convinced that it 
clearly and indifputably belonged to the tribe of Pifces. From the 
very Angular figure and fituation of the eyes in this creature, I have 
ventured to give it the generic name of Stykpborus ; and as the 
trivial name cannot be taken from any circumftance more properly 
than from the extraordinary thread-like procefs of the tail, I have 
therefore applied that of chordatus. The Stylephorus chordatus is 
a native of the Weft Indian Sea. It was taken between the Iflands 
of Cuba and Martinico, near a fmall clufter of little iflands about 
nine leagues from fliore, and was feen fwimming near the furface. 
The whole length of this uncommon animal, from the head to 
the extremity of the caudal procefs, is about thirty-two inches, 
of which the procefs itfelf meafures twenty-two. 

Tab. 6. reprefents the animal of its natural fize. 



VIII. De- 



Zinn.7>ww.I. iah, S.p. Sf. 




jA^rec^t^^^, 



( 93 ) 



VIII • Defcrtption of the Hirudo viridisj a new Engli/h Leech ^ by George 
Shaw, M. D. F. R. S, Fellow of the Linnean Society. 

Read December 2, 1788. 

AMONGST the variety of fmaller animals which I have oc- 
cafionally examined, there are fome which appear to me to 
have entirely efcaped the obfervation of naturalifts ; having no 
place in the Syftema Natune of Linnaeus, or in any of the numerous 
publications which have from time to time added to the (lock of 
natural hiftory ; fo that they may be confidered as abfolute non- 
defcripts, and as fuch may be thought more deferving a particular 
furvey. 

The animal which I now purpofe to defcribe is a fmall and very 
elegant fpecies of Hirudo or Leech, which is to be found in fuch 
waters as are more than commonly clear and cold, or at leaft fuch 
as do not very eafily freeze during a common froft. This fpecies 
of Hirudo is not much more than the eighth of an inch in length* 
and I have feen it even lefs. In its general fliape or outline it very 
much refembles the fpecies called Hirudo complanata, or the fmall 
black leech (except that the extremity of its body is of a fomewhat 
{harper form). The colour of this animal is a deep and beautiful 
grafs-green ; and, when magnified, a tranfparent edge or border ap- 
pears to furround it. The eyes are two in number, and of a deep 

black. 



94 -DR* Shaw'j Defcriptitm of 

black. Its motions are in every rcfpedl analogous to thofe of the 
Hirudo complanataj Jiagnalisy and oSoculata^ which are all three fuffi- 
ciently common in this country ; but the fmall fpecies now defcrib. 
' ing feems to poffefs a greater degree of contractile power than the 
three former, fmce it often aflumes a fliape approaching to a circular 
outline. Its general motion is an uniform fmooth progreffion, which 
is occafionally varied by a circular motion, as if turning flowly on 
an axis. 

This little animal, after being kept for a few days in a gjafs of its 
native water, feldom fails to appear filled with 5 or 6 ova, of a very 
confiderable fize in proportion to the parent animal, and which are 
of a much ftronger and tougher nature than one would eafily 
imagine ; fmce, when taken out of the body, and preffed on a glafs, 
it requires a confiderable degree of force to break them. Their 
form is exa6lly oval, and their colour a deep brown. The larger 
fpecies of the genus Hirudo are known to be viviparous ; but the 
H. oSocu/ata is (according to Linnaeus) oviparous, and produces a 
peculiar fort of ovum, which it depofits on the ftalks of water 
plants, and from which the young is afterwards excluded. It ftiould 
feem therefore that this very fmall green Hirudo is oviparous alfo, 
and probably may depofit its ova in the fame manner. 

The remarkable colour of this diminutive fpecies is alone fufii- 
cient to diftinguiili it at firft fight from every other fpecies yet 
known : as a trivial name, therefore, Hirudo viridis cannot be im- 
proper; and its fpecific charader may be comprifed with fufficient 
exadtnefs in a very few words, viz. 

H. viridis oblonga, extremitate acutiufcula. 

To the above account of the Hirudo viridisy I muft beg permiffion 

to add the extraordinary power of reproduftion which the fmaller 

fpecies of thagenus Hirudo are poffefled of. This reproductive power 

is moft confpicuous in the H.Jagnalisy complanata^ and oSloculata^ in 

which 





( 



J 



Linii.Tranf.I. tab. 7 . p. ^5 






Q^C/rf/^o i^/?/c//^. 



tis Hiruda viridis. 95 

which animals it almoft equals that of the polype. I do not re- 
coiled whether Spallanzani, and others who have attended to the 
fubjeft of animal reprodu6tions, have included tfciefe animals in 
their lift. My own experiments were made in the year I77jt 
during which year thefe animals were divided in every pofliblc 
direction ; and the divided parts, after reprbdu6tion9 were again fub* 
divided, and again reproduced, without the failure of one fingle 
part. 

Tab. 7. reprefents the Hirudo viridis both of its natural fize 
and magnified. 



( 96 ) 



IX. The Botanical Htjiory of the Canella alba, by Olof Swariz^ M.B. 
Foreign Member of the Linnean Society. 

Read December 2, 1788. 

THIS tree, the bark of which has frequently been miftaken 
for the real Cortex Winteranus, has, like many other medi- 
cinal plants, been hitherto but imperfeftly known to botanifts. 

Clufius is the fir ft who has recorded the introdu6lion of this 
bark from the Weft-Indies, which feems to have been at the be- 
ginning of the feventeenth century ; as he fays in his Exot. lib. iv. 
cap. 4i de Canella alba quorundam, " Ante paucos annos (before 
1605) coepit exoticus cortex inferri, cui nomen Ganellae albse indi- 
derunt f * and it confequently became firft known about 20 years after 
Winter's return from the Straits of Magellan ; whofe bark we alfo 
find to have been firft mentioned and defcribed by Clufius j in notis in 
Garcianij p. 30, under the name of Cortex Winteranus, as a compli- 
ment to the difcoverer. , 

Caspar Bauhin mentions our bark feveral times in his Pinaxi 
and calls it, p. 409, 

Pfeudo-caflia cinnamomea Americana. 

Canella Peruana. 

5 ^ Canella 




DA. SwARTz'i Botanical Hi/lory^ &c^ 97 

Canella tubis minoribus alba ; and, p. 4619 

Caflia lignea Jamaicenfis laureolae foliis fubcinereis, corticc pipcris 
modo acri ♦. 

Parkinson gave, a fliort time after {Tbeatr. p. 1581), a prolix de- 
tail concerning the difference between thefe two kinds of bark, and 
tells us it was a common thing in his time to miltake one for the 
other. 

But John Bauhin feems to have firft confounded the names, 
by ftyling the Cortex Winteranus, Canella alba. iJi^. t. i. 1. 4, 
p. 460. 

Plukenet, who probably knew fomething more of the tree 
than its baik only, found great . difficulty in difcriminating the 
fynonyma ; as he fays, in his Almag. Mant. p. 40, ^^ Varie inter 
fe plurimum diverfae plantae per illarum ignorationem plane con- 
funduntur.'* But he does not himfelf correft this fault, as he gives 
a very falfe reprefentation of a branch from the tree, that yields 
the true Winter's Bark {Phytogr. tab. 81, f. i), which he certainly 
never faw. 

He has however enumerated the former in his Almageft, p. 89, 
under the name of CafTia cinnamomea ; feu, 

Cinnamomum fylveftre Barbadenfium, arbor baccifera, fruftu 
calyculato 4 pyreno, folio enervi. 

Dale (JPharmacolog. p. 296) very precifely indicates, that Cortex 
Winteranus^is very fcarce in the (hops, and that the apothecaries 
fupply the want of it with the bark of Canella alba. 

* Several authors have formerly given this tree difFerent names s as 
Canella Cubane. Jonf. dendr. 165. 
Arbor Jucaiae. Nieremb, 294. 
Arbor cujus cortex gingiber semulatur. Laet. 24. 

Lignum feu potius cortex aromaticus. Ejufd. in fcMio ad Cap. di Lignis aromattcis. 
Monard. p. 324, &c. 

Q Sir 



98 Dr. SwARTz'i Botanical Hiftory 

Sir Hans Sloane, we find, was canvinced of the difference be- 
tween them, as he gave feparate defcriptions of each, in the Tranf- 
adlions of the Royal Society. Notwithftanding this, he feems to be 
in fome doubt (probably through want of fyftematic knowledge) 
if the difference might not depend upon the place of growth : at 
leaft, he fays, the one may ferve as a good fuccedaneum for the 
other ; though he confefTes that the true Winter's Bark is muck 
the more aromatic of the two. 

The Ganella alba is to be found as well in the TranfaSionsj No. 192, 
p. 462, as in the Hilary of Jamaica^ voL ii. p. 87 j where the author 
calls it 

Arbor baccifera laurifolia aromatica, frudlu viridi calyculato. 

The botanical diftindion was afterwards paid very little attention 
to by feveral writers on the Materia Medica; as Lemeiy, Pomet*, &c* 
And it is to be fuppofed that they have led Linnaeus (not attending 
to the evidence of the old botanifts) into this error of combining 
two different genera under the name of Lauras Winterana + : but 
he feparated this fpecies from Lauras, in the enfuing editions, as a 
diftinft genus, and called it Winterania ; under which name it has 
been univerfally but improperly known. 

This miftake has however been fully developed by the late difco- 
very of the Cortex Winteranus of Clufius and Sloane, a produ6lion 
of IViniera aromatica (from the neighbourhood of the antar6tic 
regions), whofe exiftence has remained in oblivion nearly a century, 
fmce it made its firft appearance in the Tranfadlions of the Royal 
Society, in the year 1692. 

It is the late Dr. Fothergill who has, with the affiftance of Dr. 

• Lemtry^ Di£f. de$ Droguesy p. 170. P^met^ Hift. des Drogues^ p. 147. 
I Spec. Plant, rrf. i,^ 371, w. 11. Hort. Qiff. 448. Mat. Md. 66. 196. 

7 Solander, 



tif the CantUa alba. 99 

Solander^ handed down to pofterity the real marks of that new 
genus, in vol. v. of Med. Obf. and Inq. p. 46 & feq. 

As, however, even of late, * there has been a relation fuppofed 
between thofe two genera, the following defcription, taken from a 
number of perfefl: fpecimens, will remove all doubt of their being 
totally diftinft. 

Canella alba is a tree whofe ftem rifes from 10 to 50 feet in 
height, very ftraight and upright, and branched only at the top. 
The bark is whitifh, by which it is commonly known at firft fight 
in the woods. 

The branches are ereft, and not fpreading. 

The leaves are petiolated, and grow in an alternate order, but not 
regularly. They are oblong, pointed at the end, entire in the 
margin, and without any diftin£t nerves or veins ; of a dark green 
hue, a thick confiftence, like thofe of laurel, and fhining. 

The flowers grow at the tops of the branches in clufters, but 
upon divided footftalks : they are {mall and feldom open, and of 
a violet colour. 

The chara6ler of the flowers is as follows in botanical language^ 
which is the moft proper and expreflive. 

Cal. Perianthium monophyllum 3 lobunu 

hobi ad bafin fere divifi, fubrotundi, concavi, incumben- 
tes, virides, glabri, membranacei, perfiflentes. 

Cor. Petala 5 calyce longiora, oblonga, feflilia, concava, ere£ta, 
duo paulo anguftiora, confiflentia, decidua. 

Nediarium urceolatum, longitudine petalorum, antherife- 
rum, deciduum. 

Stam. Filamcnta nulla. 

♦ Linn. SuppL p. 247. 

O a Anther 4e 



100 Dr. SwartzV Botanical Hjjlory 

Anther a it linearcs parallelae, diftindtae, longitudinalitcr 
ne6lario extus adnatae, univalves. 

Polkn luteum. 
Pi ST. Germen fuperum, intra ne£tarium, ovatum. 

Stylus cylindricus, longitudine nedlarii. 

Stigmata duo, obtufa, convexa, rugofa. 
Per. Bacca oblonga unilocularis 2 — ^ fperma. 

Semina fubrotundo-reniformia, nauco fragili nitenti te<Ela# 
The diftinguifhing marks deduced from this chara6ter are, 

Calyx trilobus. 

Corolla pentapetala. 

Anthers 21, adnatae ne6lario urceolato. 

Bacca unilocularis, 2—4 fperma. r- 

This genus, whofe name is more properly changed to that of 
Canella, cannot be removed from dodecandria, where it has formerly 
been, notwithftanding its flowers bear fome fimilarity to thofe of 
the fixteenth clafs. But on the fame principle, Melia^ Trichilia^ 
Samyday Erythroxylonj &c. fhould alfo change their place, which 
feems not very juft, as they cannot be ranged among the Columni- 
ferae, the natural tribe of that clafs. 

There are various figures given of this plant by feveral authors; 
as by Plukenet, in the Phytogr. tab. 160, f . 1 ; by Sloane, in the 
Hijlory of Jamaicay vol. ii. tab. 191, f. 2, and in the Philofophical 
^ranjacl. 1692, No. 192 ; by Gates by, in his Hijlory of Carolina^ 
vol. ii. p. 50, tab. 50; by Mrs. Blackwell, in her Icon. tab. 206; 
and, laftly, by Browne, in his Natural Hijlory of Jamaicay tab. 27, 
f. 2. The laft is the only tolerable one among them all; but it feems 
fo little underftood by Browne himfelf, that he has referred Breynia 
fruticofa, fol. fingularibus oblorigo-ovatis fuperne nitidis, &c. Hift. 
of Jam. p. 246, n. 3, to this figure, evidently that of the CancUa alba^ 
5 of 



of the Canella alba. loi 

, of whofe parts of fhiftification he? has annexed another drawing 
on the fame plate (fig. 3), though lefs accurate and diftinguifhable. 

The tree is pretty common in moft parts of the Weft-India Iflands, 
and is frequently found near the fea-coaft, but then feldom exceed* 
ing 12 or 15 feet : in the inland woods it attains a more confidera- 
ble height. 

The whole tree is very aromatic, and when in bloflbm perfumes 
the whole neighbourhood. The flowers dried, and foftened again 
in warm water, have a fragrant odour, nearly approaching to that 
of mu(k. The leaves have a ftrong fmell of laurel. The berries, 
after having been fome time green, turn blue, and become at laft of 
a black glofly colour, and have a faint aromatic tafte and fmell. 
They "Tire when ripe, as well as the fruit of feveral kinds of laurel, 
very agreeable to the JVhite-bellied and Bald^paU Pigeons (Columba 
Jamaicerifis & Ieucocepha/a)^\yhich feeding greedily upon them, acquire 
that peculiar flavour fo much admired in the places where they are 
found. 

This bark, together with the fruit of Capficum, were formerly 
common ingredients in the food and drink of the Caraibs, the an- 
cient natives of the Antilles ; and even at prefent it makes a necef- 
lary addition to the meagre pot of the Negroes. 

It is not neceflary to expatiate further upon the medicinal quali- 
ties of this bark, as it has been for ages in high repute, and occupies 
in the prefent Pharmacopoeia the room of the old bark of Winter, 
which by the London Committee was thrown out of the New 
Materia Medica, as a drug not lefs rare than hitherto imperfedly 
known ; and there is no doubt that Canella alba may with advantage 
be fubftituted in its room. 



The 



I02 Dr. SwARTz'i Botanical Hifioryy tic. 

The annexed plate (/. 8) reprefents a branch of the tree in 
flower, and the berries of their natural fize. 

ap A flower, with its petals forcibly expanded. 

b^ The fame magnified, fo as to (hew the infertion of the nee* 

tarium in the middle* 
r, The neftarium magnified feparately, with the anthera longitu- 
dinally inferted. 
dy The fame cut through on one fide, and extended, exhibiting 

twenty-one linear antherse. 
if The piftillum {landing on the three-lobed cal)rx magnified, 
with the two ftigmata. 

. fy The baccaof its natural fize, tranfverfely cul^ with one feed 
remaining fixed to the fide. 
jf. The feeds of the natural fize. 



X. Defcrip- 



Zvm,Dxm^.r tab. S^p.Wl. 




(^an^//a a/^y. 



yft, /.^ 



( "3 ) 



X* Defcriptien of the Cancer Jlagnalis of LinrueuSy by George SbaWj 
M^ D. F. R. S. Fellow of the Linnean Society. 

Read January 6, lySp, 

THE Cancer ftagnalis of Linnseus being certainly one of the 
moft curious animals of the genus to which it belongs, and 
being not yet fo generally known as the reft of the Britifti fpecies ; 
I hope the following obfervations, which I have had frjequent op-, 
portunities of making on this infe6t, and particularly thofe which 
relate to its infant ftate, or firft appearance from the egg, may be not 
unacceptable to the Linnean Society. 

The Cancer ftagnalis is generally found in fuch waters as are of 
a foft nature, and particularly in thofe fmall ftiallows of rain-water 
which are fo frequently feen in the fpring and autumn, and in 

which the Monoculus Pulex of Linnaeus, and other fmaller animal- 

I 

cula abound. At firft view this infe6l bears fome refemblance to 
the infeft which fome writers have called Squilla aquatica, or the 
larva of a Dytifcus ; but when viewed nearly it is found to be of a 
much more curious and elegant appearance than that animal. The 
legs, of which there are feveral pair (eleven) on each fide, are flat 
and filmy, and have the appearance of fo many waving fins, of the 
moft delicate ftrufture imaginable. The whole animal is extremely 

tranf- 



104 Dr. ShawV Defcription of 

tranfparent, and the general colour of the males is a very light 
brown, with a tinge of blueilTi green, particularly on the head and 
legs. The females have lefs of the blueifh tinge, and incline more to 
brown, except on the fpine of the back, which is of a deep dull 
blue, and which part in the males is of a deeper brown than the reft 
of the body. The head of the male is armed with two fangs of a 
very ftrong appearance, and which end in two long hooks bendmg 
inwards; and between the fangs lies a very curious apparatus, which 
will be more particularly defcribed hereafter. .The eyes are very 
protuberant, and, as it were, furnillied with a ftalk, as in the reft of 
the genus Cancer. The female is deftitute of the two long fangs 
which are fo confpicuous in the male, and, inftead of them, is only 
furniftied with a ftrong, thick, ftiort pair of forceps : but what 
pnncipally and immediately diftinguifhes the female, is a large, oval, 
fharp-pointed bag of ova, which is fituated underneath the lower 
part of the body where the tail commences. It is remarkable that 
the fmaller fized females are frequently furnifhed with this bag of 
ova, as well as the larger ones. The tail, which is perfe£lly. aUke 
in both fexes, is of a red colour, more or lefs deep, from the middle 
to the very end, which is forked into two veiy iTiarp points. Thefe 
creatures fhould feem by their appearance to be of a predaceous 
nature, and I have no doubt that they really are fo ; the ftrufture 
of their fangs feeming to be particularly adapted to the purpofe of 
feizing their prey : yet I never obferved thofe which I kept, to attack 
any of the animalcules which were in the fame water : on the con- 
trary, the Monoculus conchaceus very frequently affaults them, and 
adheres with fuch force to their tails, or legs, as fometimes to tear off 
a part in the ftruggle. The C. ftagnalis delights much in funftiine, 
during which it appears near the furface of the water, fwimming on 
its back, and moving in various diredtions by the fueceffive undula- 
tions of its numerous fin*like legs, and moving its tail in the manner 

of 



Cancer Jiagnalis of Linnaus. -105 

of a rudder. On the lead difturbance, it ft arts in the manner of a 
fmall fifli, and endeavours to fecrete itfelf by diving into the foft mud. 
It changes its fkin at certain periods, as is evident from the exuviae 
or floughs being frequently found in the water in which thefe ani- 
mals are kept. 

Linnaeus, as appears by his defcription in the laft edition of the 
Fauna Suecica, had obferved this infect; but though he particularly 
mentions the appearance of the ovarium in the female, he propofes 
a moft extraordinary doubt, whether it may not prove to be the 
larva of fome fpecies of Ephemera. He alfo repeats the fame queftion 
in the Syftema Naturae. 

The only writer who has given a very ample defcription of the 
Cancer ftagnalis, is SchaefFer, who has called it Apus pifciformis. 
He does not allow the parts on each fide to be genuine legs, but 
rather a fort of branchiae; and as the animal has no other parts 
which can be called legs, he therefore gave it the name of Apus. 
He has given a very good magnified view of the male infe6t, and 
figures of both male and female in their natural fize; but thefe 
figures feem to have been taken from fmall fpecimens, and are by 
no means calculated to give a clear idea of the elegant appearance of 
the animal itfelf. 

I alfo find it figured in the' 57th volume of the Philofophical 
Tranfaftions, for the year 1767 ; where it is alfo defcribed, but the 
figures are inaccurate. In the defcription it is very judicioufly ob- 
ferved, that fince they are furnifhed with ovaria replete with eggs, it 
feems not probable that they fhould ever undergo a further change, 
but that they are in their perfeft or ultimate ftate. 

SchaefFer, who is exa6l enough in his general defcription, had no 
opportunity of obferving the infedl in its firft ftate, or immediately 
from the egg ; it is therefore this part of its hiftory which was ftill 
wanting to complete the defcription of fo curious an-animal. 

P In 



lo6 Dr. Shaw'j Defcription of the 

In March and April the females depofit their eggs, without any 
fettled order, and perfcdlly loofe in the water. They appear to the 
naked eye like very minute globules of a light brown colour; fcarce, 
if at all, exceeding in fize the particles of the farina in a mallow: and 
what makes this comparifon the more juft, is, that each ovum, when 
magnified, is extren\ely like one of the globules of farina in that 
plant; for it is thickly befet on every fide wjth fharp fpines, 
the length of which is equal to about the fourth part of the dia- 
meter of the egg. Befides thefe fpines, the egg is coated over with 
a tranfparent fubftance, reaching juft to the extremities of the 
fpines. 

This is a particularity of ftru6lure which I do not remember to 
have obferved in the ovum of any other infe6t; and may probably 
be intended to affift in caufing them to adhere to the fubftances on 
which they fall when depofited in the water, or elfe as a fecurity 
from the fmaller water-infe£ls. 

In the fpace of a fortnight, or in cold weather rather more, they 
are hatched ; and the young animals may be feen to fwim with great 
livelinefs by means of three very long pairs of arms, or rowers, which 
appear difproportioned to the fize of the animal : and indeed it bearS, 
in this very fmall ftate, not much refemblance to the form which it 
afterwards affumes; but, in the (hort fpace of a very few hours, the 
body appears confiderably lengthened, and it begins to acquire the 
remarkable character of the divided tail-fin, which fo ftrikingly dif- 
tinguilhes the parent animaL In this very young ftate the eyes do 
not appear pedunculated, but like a dark fpot on the middle of the 
head. 

On the feventh day after hatching, they approach pretty nearly to 

the form of the complete animal, except that they ftill retain the 

two firft or long pairs of rowers or arms : the legs however, or fins, are 

at this period very vifible. After this time it lofes the long rowers, 

4 and 



Cancer jl agnails of Linnaus. icyj 

and appears ftill more like the infedt in its advanced ftate. Its 
growth, however, is but flow; and in all probability a very confide- 
rable time elapfes before the infe6t acquires its full fize: but this I 
cannot prefume to determine, fince thofe which were hatched in the 
glafles in which I kept them, died before they had acquired any con- 
fiderable fize. 

In order to obtain thefe infeds in a young ftiate, nothing more is 
required than to keep the females fele6ted for this purpofe in fepa- 
rate glafles of the fame water in which they naturally refided. The 
glafles fliould be fmall; and, when the eggs' are depofited, the parent 
infedts mufl: be removed, and the glafles kept in a temperate room. 

When firft hatched, they are very little fuperiorin fize to a com- 
mon mite. 

The three microfcopic views of the young animals were drawn 
with the greatefl: attention, and their accuracy may be fafely 
depended upon. 

Tab. 9. Fig. i. Shews the young infe£l very foon after hatching. 

Fig. 2. Reprefents it fome hours after, at which time the forking 
of the tail is juft vifible, as well as the fegments of the body; whereas, 
in fig. I, the body has not yet lengthened itfelf fufiiciently to fliew 
the joints of which it confifts, or the forking of the tail. 

Fig. 3. Shews it on the feventh day after hatching. 

It is remarkable that the Cancer fl:agnalis, in its complete fl:ate, 
though of the mofl: delicate fl:ru6lure, is yet capable of fupporting 
a very confiderable degree ofdold, as is evident from the animal ma- 
king its appearance in the middle of the day in very fliallow waters, 
which have been almofl: entirely ft'ozen during the night. Yet 
SchaefFer reprefents thofe which he found to be exceedingly impa- 
tient of cold; and adds that he has known a whole race of them 
completely killed in their native water by a very flight froft. This 
is certainly not the cafe in our own country. I have feen great num- 

P 2 bers 



io8 Dr. ShawV Def caption of the 

bers of them in the months of December and January, even imme- 
diately before and after intenfe frofts, feemingly as vigorous and 
lively as in the fpring and fummer: they muft therefore either 
plunge themfelves to fuch a depth in the foft mud as to be fecure 
from the froft, or elfe they are not injured by being frozen for a 
time. 



MICROSCOPIC DESCRIPTION. 

IN an infe6t of fo confiderable a fize as this, a microfcopical de- 
fcription might feem unneceffary: this has, however, been given by 
SchaefFer; and mod of the parts which he has mentioned, are figured 
in his work with fufficient accuracy. But it is to the laft degree afto- 
niftiing that he has entirely omitted the defcription of the moft cu- 
rious part in the whole animal; nor does the leaft trace of it appear 
in the magnified figure .which he has given of the male infe6l. This 
part is the apparatus for feizing its prey, and which is peculiar to 
the male J the female having only a very Ihort beak or mouth in the 
place of it. 

This apparatus confifts of two very long flat trunks, proceeding 
from between the long hooked parts or exterior fangs, fo confpi- 
cuous in the male infedt. Thefe trunks are generally rolled up fide 
by fide, and carried in the fame manner as the probofcis of a but- 
terfly, fo as not to be externally vifible, except by a flight protube- 
rance; but when extended they reach to a very confiderable diftance, 
fo as to exceed that' of the hooks or exterior fangs. 

It fhould be obferved that, from the part whence thefe trunks pro^ 
ceed, the real mouth of the creature is placed, which confifl:s of two 

large 



Cancer Jlagnalis of Litmaus. • 109 

large concave fcales, placed perpendicularly, and f urnifhed with toothed 
edges, meeting each other. It is from each fide of this mouth that 
the trunks proceed. The particular ftrufture of the trunks is as 
follows. The body of each is a long and moderately broad flat part, 
extended in a ftraight line when expanded, and ending in a jagged 
extremity, befet with very fharp teeth, like thofe of a fifh : it is alfo 
divided, from the root to the extremity, into a very great number of 
tranfverfe fpaces, each of which terminates in a tooth at the edge; fo 
that the whole trunk is edged on both fides with a continued row 
of teeth. Befides the teeth, each trunk is alfo furniOied with three 
lateral branches, or appendages, fituated at fome diftance from each 
other, on the outward edge of the trunk. Thefe lateral branches are 
armed near the ends ^yith feveral very ftrong and excefTively (harp 
teeth, not only on the edge, but on the furface itfelf, and on the tips. 
Laftly, it muft not be omitted that the bafes of the fangs them- 
felves are furnifhed with a double range of extremely fharp teeth> 
of a much larger fize than any of the others: they are placed in fuch 
a manner that the points of the teeth of one range look exadlly 
contrary to thofe of the other ; and by this means muft enable the 
infeft to commit the moft fevere depredations on fuch animals as are 
its deftined food. But why the female fhould not be provided with a 
fimilar apparatus, is an enquiry not eafily to be anfwered. 

The figure marked No. 8, is an exa6l fketcli of the whole appa- 
ratus of the mouth, expanded and magnified; in which the fet of 
teeth at the bafe of each of the hooks of the fangs, is very confpi- 
cuous. The upper part of the real maxillse, or toothed fcales, com- 
pofing the mouth, is alfo feen; and the trunks, with their lateral ap- 
pendages, are reprefented in their relative proportions. 

It is probable that the extremities of the fangs are tubular, for at 
the tips there is an appearance of a narrow opening; but of this I 
cannot fpeak with certainty* 

My 



Ito • Dr. ShawV De/cnptm, &c. 

My obfervations on this infedl: were made long before I had fecn 
SchaefFer's work. I then fketched feveral parts by the microfcope, 
which I^fterwards found had been already done by SchaefFer. The 
annexed plate therefore contains only a few particulars which he 
has omitted, befides the perfed infe6l. 

EXPLANATION OF TAB. 9. 

Fig. I, 2, 3. Cancer ftagnalis in a young ftate magnified. Sec 
page 107. 

4. The perfe6t ^nfe6t, female, natural fize. 

5. Ditto, male. 

6. Eggs. 

7. An egg magnified. 

8. The apparatus of the mouth. 



XL On 



Linn.Tr€0%t.I. tab.^.p.JlO. 




(^r/irer . * Y^y y//r/v^/. 



n 



( m ) 



XL On the Fejluca J^adlcea^ and Anthoxanthum paniculatum^ of Linnaeus. 
By James Edward Smithy M. D. F. R. S. Prefident of the Linnean 
Society. 

Read February 3, 1789. 

IN the academical differtation intitled Plantae MartinoBurferianse, 
publiftied at Upfal in the year 1745, under the aufpices of 
Linnaeus, mention is made (page 2, No. 13) of a grafs with the 
following fynonyms: 

Graminis fpartei fpecies. 

Anthoxanthum floribus paniculatis. 

Gramen fparteum panicula flavefcente. Rudb. Ely/, x. f. 14. 

This was copied in the Amoenit. Academ. and admitted into the 
firft edition of Species Plantarum, anno 1753, ^7 ^^^ name of 
Anthoxanthum paniculatum^ and there faid to grow in the fouth of 
Europe. 

It appears that Linnaeus defcribed this grafs from the fpecimen 
in Burfer's Herbarium only; it not being to be found, at leaft not 
under that name, in his own coUeftion. 

In his interleaved copy of Species Plant, ed. i, I find the fol- 
lowing MS. note upon this plant: 

^^ Facies Anthoxanthi odorati, fed rigidius. Calyces quadriflori. 
Flores mutici. Forte diverfi generis. Inquirenda ulterius.'* 

In 



n 



112 Dr. Smiths jiccount of 

In the fecond edition of that work, the plant appears with the 
fame fynonyms, and the following note : 

'' Gramen in vivo ulterius examinandum iis quibus adeft. Facies 
eft Anthoxanthi odorati. Calyces quadriflori. Flores mutici." And 
Linnaeus adds, that it grows " in Horto Dei Monfpelienfi," which is 
a fpot celebrated for its botanical riches ever fmce the days of 
Belleval, and which Burfer vifited in the tour which he made 
through Europe in fearch of plants. 

No one, however, has been able to make out what Linnseus 
meant by his Anthoxanthum paniculatum. The Montpelier bota- 
nifts have gone many a pilgrimage to the Hortus Dei, without 
finding any thing which anfwered to the defcription; infomuch that 
profefTor Gouan, in his lUuftrationes Botanicae, page a, has afferted 
that Anthoxanthum paniculatum ought to be ftruck out of the 
Linnaean Syftem, nothing being to be found in the place where it 
is faid to grow, but the common A. odoratum. 

In my vifit to Oxford laft year, with Sir Jofeph Banks and Mr. 
Dryander, one great object of my curiofity was the firft volume of 
Rudbeck's celebrated Campi Elyfii, which is preferved in the She- 
rardian library, and of which there are but three copies extant. I 
fought out the figure quoted for the grafs in queftion,^ and immedi- 
ately perceived it to be nothing elfe than the Poa Gerardi of AUioni's 
Flora Pedemontana, a plant I had gathered the preceding fummer on 
Mount Cenis. Taking an exa6l copy of Rudbeck's figure, and on 
my return to town comparing it with my fpecimen, I had not a 
doubt remaining on the fubjedl. 

It appears likewife that profeflbr Gouan himfelf has gathered 
the plant ; for I find in the Linnaean Herbarium an imperfeft fpe- 
cimen of it fent by him, under the name of a Feftuca, to which 
genus it really belongs. But this fpecimen Linnaeus omitted to name; 
nor did he recolledt that he had defcribed the plant already. 

The 



the F^uca fpaHceay &c. 113 

The accurate Gerand^ in his Flora Gallo-provincialisi has given the 
firfl good defcription of this grais^ accompanied with an excellent 
figure of its panicle of flowers, but no fynonyms. Haller has like- 
tdfe defcribed it as a Poa, and quotes Gerard : but afi it appears 
rather to belong to the genus of Feftuca, I beg leave to of&r a new 
differentia fpecifica an defcription of it. 

Fbstuca panicuU ert&ip fpiculis ovatis quadriflorisy glumis acu* 

minatis muticis, foliis fetaceis glabris pungentibus. 
PoA panicull ereSiif fpiculis trifloris glabrb^ corollis acuminatis, 

calyce duplo longioribus. Ger. Galbhfrm. 91, tab. 2, f. i. 
PoA culmo refto^locuftis trifloris glaberrimis, calycibus ariftatis. 

Hall. Uifl. V. 2^ 223, No. 1463. 
PoA GerardL AUkiu Flor. Pedcmont. V. 2, 245, No. 2201. 
AnthoxantHum (paniculatum) floribus paniculatis. Lmn. Sp. 

PI. 40^ Am. Acad. 1. 145. 
Gramen fparteum^ panicull flavefcente. Rudb. Elyf. V. I9 40^ 

f. 14. 

Habitat in prat is et pafcuis alpinis. % 

Radix perennis, casfpitofa^ fibrofa. 

GifLMi tripedales, ere^, ftri^i> teretes, (triati, glaberrimi: geni- 

culo uno alterove purpurea 
Folia involuto-fetacea^ ftrida, glaberrima^ ftriata, mucronato- 

pungentia^ glauca; bafi dilatato-membranacea, vaginantia^ 

albida. Stipule intrafoliacese, breviflimxy aiit nuUse. 
Panicula ere6la, ramofa, multifiorai laxa, aureo-fpadicea, ra* 

mis plerumque binis. 
Pedvnculi angUlati, fubflexnofi, eredi. 
SpicuLiB ovatse^ compreflse, plerumque quadriflorx, glabrae. 
Galycis valvulse fubsequales^ carinatas^ acuminataCf nee aril- 

tatas, margine membranaceo-pellucidas^ bafi fufcse. 

Q COROLLJE 



/ 



114 ^^* SmithV Account vf 

CoROLLiE: bivalves^ altera majori cariiiati alteram ampleftens^ 

calyce longiores, acuminatae. 
Stamina. ^^Filamenta tria, breviffima. Anthcra purpurafcen- 

tes, inclufae." Gerard* , ' .: . ^i ; 

• PiSTiLLUM. Styli duo, brevifSmi. iSV/^/wVr/4. plqotiofa. ; ; 
Semen unicum, oblongum, \itrinque acutum, fuperne ftdco 

longitudinali notatum, fufcum. 
Obs. Panicula variat magis vol minus ramofa, 

Lmnaeuis feems to have fefer'reid :tbi6 ;plai)t to the g^iu^ of An- 
thoxanthum, merely frotn the habit and coloar of its flowers, in 
both which refpe^ts they have a ^leat iTefemblance to the A^odo- 
ratum. He probably could i;^t ^iff^rd: thofpecipen^of Burfer, to 
inveftigate its fruftification : but^Qerard aswell as myfelf ihave 
examined the flowers living, and found them to betriandrous. Their 
beautiful gold or bronze-like colour js n9ticed by Gerard ; which is 
a little extraordinary, as he rarely mentions cql|Our in his de^rip- 
tions. 

I have lately learnt from Savoy that this grafs is likely to become 
of confiderable ufe in agriculture, and that large quantities of it 
are now cultivating for that purpofe. It has vegetated in Ghelfea 
garden, under the care of Mr. Fairbairh, from feed f br6light from 
Mount Cenis. ' ^ > '' ...if'. 



ADDI- 



the Fejluca Jpadicea^ fi?c. 115 



ADDITIONAL REMARKS. 



Read OSlober 5, 1790. 

WHEN the preceding obfervations were laid before the Lin- 
nean Society, I named the grafs in queftion Feftuca anthoxantha^ 
in allufion, not only to its old generic name, but alfo to the yellow 
colour of its flowers^ 

At the fame time I had a fecret fufpicion of its being the Feftuca 
ipadicea of Gouan's lUuIlrationes Botanica^^ page 4^ and Linnseus's 
Syftema Naturse, ed. 12, v. 2,. p. 732. I was almoft convinced that 
the defcription found in the place laft quoted had been made from 
the very fpecimen above mentioned, now in the Linnean Herba- 
rium, In order to fettle this point, I fent one of my own fpecimens, 
without any remarks, to profeflbr Gouan, and have juft received 
for anfwer that it is certainly his Feftuca fpadicea. To this name 
that of F. anthoxantha muft therefore give way, as the Linnean 
name has the right of priority, and is indeed very apt. 

Since my former paper was written, I have alfo coUefted fome fy- 
nonyms of the above grafs, from the Sherardian Herbarium, part 
of which I have looked over in company with profeflbr John 
Sibthorp. They are the following. 

Gramen paniculatum, alpinum, radice crafliflima, foliis rigidis,. 
ftriatis, et afperis, panicuia fufcd non ariftat^. Michelii Hort. 
Pi/an. 75. 

Q 2 G. mon- 



ii6 Di. Smith*! Account of 

G. montanum paniculS. fpadiccA craffiore. fournef. Inf. 524. 
Nardus fpuria Narbonenfis. C Bauh. Pin. 13. 
Nardus Gangitis fpuria Norbonae* Lob. Adverfar. 43. 

The laft fynonym is added on the authority of Micheli, as well 
as from the defcription and incomplete figure of LobeL Micheli 
alfo confirms the fynonym of Tournefort. 

Hence we learn, that Linnaeus has totally mifapplied the above 
fynonyms of Bauhin and Lobel, in quoting them as belonging to 
his Nardus Gangitis. That the latter is quite a different plant, ap- 
pears from his own Herbarium; and Linnatus has committed a 
greater error in his quotation of Morifon; for inftead of fedtion 
8, t. 13, fig. ultima of that author, the figure he fhould have 
quoted is the laft but one, ^^figura ultima being quite a different 
plant from all the above : and yet I am afraid the differentia fpeci- 
fica in Species Plantarum (fpici recurvft) was made from too 
great an attention to this mifquoted figure*. At any rate, that 
character is very bad, as being equally applicable to the common 
Nardus ftri6la. What is ftill more unfortunate is, that the N. Gan- 
gitis is no Nardus at all, but appears to belong rather to RottboUia, 
or at leafl to the fame genus with RottboUia incurvata (^Egilops 
incurvata Linn.), as probably does the Nardus Thdinae likewife. 

The foregoing obfervations exhibit a feries of errors and mifcon- 
ceptions, which can fcarcely be paralleled in the botanical hiflory 
of any other plant, and thofe the errors of the greateft men j owing 
to which, the Anthoxanthimi pardculatum and Nardus Gangitis 
have been enveloped in more obfcurity, and the labours of enqui- 



* The figure of Morifon is fo confofed, diat this error could harAjr be avoided 
is certairt, however, that all his three fpikes of flowers belong to the laft figure. 

6 



nng; 



ZmnSranAl. ta»Mp.n7. 




n 



\ 



the Tejiuca J^aHcta^ &c. 117 

ring botanifts have been more frequently rendered abortive than 
in any fimilar cafe, except thofe^ indeed, in which writers on the 
Materia Medica, with their fovereign power of confounding, have 
interfered. Such miflakes are not here pointed out with any invi- 
dious intention, but folely from a love of truth. Contemptible 
indeed are the critics who can triumph over the occafional inequali- 
ties of an Homer; nor lefs contemptible and ungrateful are thofc 
who, while they live but in the light they borrow from Linnaeus, can 
exult over imperfeftions, which are avoided only by perfons who 
have never exerted themfelves in the fervice of fcience or man- 
kind. 

Tab. 10. is an exa6t copy of Rudbeck^s figure above quoted^ 
traced from his Campi ElyGi in the Sherardian Library* 



XIL 0/; 



( "8 ) 



XII. On the Migration of certain Birds ^ and on other Matters relating t9 
the feathered Triies. By William Markwick^ Efq. jijociate of the 
Linnean Society. 

Read February 3, 1789. 



THE different accounts which have been publiftied by va- 
rious authors relating to the oeconomy of birds, have 
always appeared to me exceedingly ftrange and unfatisfa6tory. I 
was willing to attribute thefe contrarieties to a variety of reafons. 
I thought perhaps that different caufes operated upon thefe little 
animals, and led them to adopt different modes of living, fuitable 
to the urgency of the occafions. But at length I became rather 
confirmed in the idea, that many authors wrote not from their 
own obfervation, but from guefs, and the vague ax:counts which 
others had given before, who had flill received them from others 
no better acquainted with the fubje£t than themfelves. This de- 
termined me to make accurate obfervations of what Ihould really 
occur. I therefore offer the following remarks to the Linnean 
Society, as matters which are to be depended upon, and which I 
myfelf faw: and I the more readily enter upon this talk, as I ftiould 
apprehend if different obfervers flationed in different parts of the 
kingdom would take the trouble to notice the occurrences which 
happen, not only the catalogue of the Britilh fpecies would be 
moll correctly afcertained, but their oeconomy illuflrated fo effec- 
tually, 



Mr. MarkwickV Obfervattons on Birds. 119 

tually, that doubt and ignorance would no longer obfcure fo cu- 
rious a fubjeft. 

Catsfield, the place where thefe obfervations were made, is fitu- 
ated near Battle in Suffex, about five miles from the fea-fide. The 
country round it is finely diverfified with hill and dale. Though 
there is no large river near it, yet there is much oozy fpringy 
ground, and many woods, fome of a tolerably large extent, in the 
neighbourhood. 

I will firft fet forth in one fynoptic table the feveral particulars 
which I have been led to notice, and then mention the refult of 
my obfervations, by way of giving i general notion of the feveral 
incidents. After which I will add fome few other illuftrations, 
which could not eafily be comprifed in thefe tables. 



A TABLE, 



I 
I 

(2 



CO 

Q 

.S 
I 

JC3 



8 

c3 



1^ 



a 

I 

o 

<; 

H 
<! 



00 n 

OO M 

o c 

00 « 

1^ 



< 

I 

00 

*^ I 



o to 

COM 

o '* 

cooe 



so •• rs. 



'i 






-, ^ « o 

«^»i4 ^00 



M M v^w^ 



^9* 






<o 

00 o 
CO 

<5co 

NO to 

<co 

On ** 

<o 

«o 

<co 

^00 
»« M 






t 



p« 



o ^ 

<;co 

NO O 






00 NO 

cLou 
<co 
o c 

«0 M 

\0 «o 




<!0 



eu 
< 



r^ «o 

4'J' 



^ 



< 
o 

4" 

NO 

a. 

o 

4* 



^ 



CO 
M 

4* 



NO H 

4^ 

»^o 

<co 

o o 
co« 

<co 

►< fo 



4* 



t 



« o 

0\#\ 

<5co 

ONU^ 

• • 



4'cf 

•OON 



O to 

• • 

vo\o 

NO NO 

tr\oO 

<c8 

tONO 
■ • 



I.' 



I 






<3lO 






<co 

%i * 



So 

VD O 

M M 

<co 

CO 1^ 

h 



NO - 

18 



»ONC 

:s8 






1 



^1 



So 

NO M 
•^ CO 

NO N 

111 
J- 8- 

Sco 

00 CO 



Sco 

51- ro 

Sco 



CO 






M CO 

^co 

M 

Sco 



Sco 

II 



li 



s< 



I 

So 






8^ 

CO 



CO 



CO 



9 






CO 

coO 
coO 



CO 



WO 

H 

colZ 



bb • 
sctJ 

<o 

to to 



co2 

►- VO 

co^ 



< 

00 

w 

3 

o 

< 



. < 



^\r^ 



Sri 

Sco 

<o 

o -* 

11 

c « 

fO« 

CO 



1 



^ = I 8 g 
u 






So 

NO 



CO 



O '^ 

CO >- 



OuO. 



CO 



CO 



.fe* 



CO Qh 
M 



O. ex. 



ico 



o 

M 



:s 



Oi 

< 



H\0 

<C 



o 

CO 



ex. 

< 



% ■ 

^ b 
^ « 

I 



y 






N3 






n 



I 



I 



bo 

c 






a 

o 

Is* 

«j >• 

»•« 
••^ 

■21 
1§ 

no's 
3 C 

sg 

l1 

IS 

a 

o 

a 



J 



s 



Mr# Markwick^ Obfervations on Birds. lai 



EXPLANATORY REMARKS on the foregoing T K^KLZ. 

Hirundo ruftica — the Swallow. 
The Swallow's firft appearance was generally about the 12th of 
April, never earlier than the 7th, or later than the 27th of that 
month ; and I never faw it later in the year than the i6th of No- 
vember, and then only a fingle bird or two, the generality of them 
difappearing long before that time. 

Hirundo urbica — the Martin. 

This bird is fomewhat later m its appearance than the foregoing 
one, we having never feen it earlier than the 17th of April ; but in 
general it does not appear till towards the latter end of that month, 
and frequently not till May, having one year not been feen till the 
1 2th of May; and I never faw it later in the year than the 13th 
of November ; but, hkjB the former, the generality had disappeared 
before. 

Hirundo A pus — the Swift. 

This bird is later in its appearance than either of the two former 
ones, being hardly ever feen before the beginning of May, twice 
only on the 28th and 29th of April during the whole fixteen years ; 
and its lateft appearance was on the i8th of May; nor does it re- 
main fo late in the autumn as the former ones, the lateft 1 have ever 
obferved it being the ad of September. 

Hirundo riparia — the Sand Martin. 

As this bird is not near fo common in this country as the other 
fpecies, my obfervations on its appearance muft be uncertain, though 
I believe it generally makes its appearance very early, as I once ob- 

R ferved 



122 Mr. Markwick'j Obfervations 

ferved it on the 8th, and another year on the loth of April ; but 
fometimes, indeed, I did not fee it till late in the year, owing, I fup- 
pofe, to their being fcarce. Tlie lateft I ever faw it in the autumn 
was the 25th of September. 

Jynx Torquilla — the Wry Neck. 

The firft appearance of the Wry Neck for fixtecn years together 
was generally about the 13th of April, never earlier than the 
26th of March, nor later than th« 2Sth of April; and the lateft of 
its continuing to appear was the 14th of September. 

Cuculus canorus— /A^ Cuckoo* 

The firft of the Cuckooes being heard for fixteen )rears together 
was generally about the latter end of April, never earlier than the 
17th of that month, nor later than the 5th of May j and it conti- 
nues to fing till about the latter end of June,, the 26th being the 
lateft that I ever heard it. After that it is filent, though it conti- 
nues to make its appearance till the beginning of September, the 
14th of that month being the lateft period of my feeing it. What 
Willoughby and others affert concerning this bird's breeding in the 
neft of a fmall bird, I know to be a faA, having myfclf taken a young 
Cuckoo out of the neft of an Hedge-fparrow, and kept it in a cage 
till the approach of winter, when it died* 

Caprimulgus Europjeus — the Goat Sucker. 

I have only taken notice of feeing this bird in the year 1781, 
on the 29th of May. 

Columba Turtur— /i5^ "Turtle. 

I have only taken notice of the appearance of this bird in two 
years, 1781 and 1782, which was on the 4th and nth of June. 

Scolopax 



M f^0 Migration cf Birds. I23 

Scolopax Rufticola — the Woodcock. 

The firft appearance of the Woodcock, according to my journal 
during fixteen years, has been generally in Oftober, never earlier 
than the 12th of that month; and as to its continuance with us, I 
never faw it later than the loth of April* We have had two or 
three inftances, in this neighbourhood, of young Woodcocks being 
fhot in the fummer-time ; and I think I once faw an egg of this 
bird taken out of a neft in the neighbourhood : but their breeding 
here is very uncommon, and owing, I fuppofe, to accident ; the 
old ones perhaps having been wounded by fportfmen in the winter, 
and fo difabled from taking a long journey in the fpring* 

Scolopax Gallinago— /i&^ Snipe. 

This bird alfo generally makes its firft appearance in Oftober : I 
once faw it fo early as the 29th of September, and the 14th of April 
was the laft of my feeing it here. 

Scolopax Gallinula — the Jack Snipe. 

This bird is not fo frequently met with as the foregoing, fo that 
I cannot fpeak with certainty as to its appearance; though I believe 
it is fome time later than the common Snipe, the earlieft of my fee- 
ing it being the 20th of November, generally not before December; 
though it feems to continue with qs late, as I have feen it on the 
19th of April. 

Corvus CoYtiiXr^the Rayjlon Crow. 

This bird, being feldom feen far from the fea-coaft, has not been 
very frequently obferved by me. The earlieft of its appearance, ac- 
cording to my journals, was tlw 17th of O6tober; and I never faw 
it after the 14th of April, that being the lateft of my obferving it, 
according to my nptcs. 

R 2 Turdus 



124 Mr, Markwick'j Cbfervations 

Turdus pilaris — the Fieldfare. 

This bird is very uncertain in its appearance. Some years grcal^ 
flocks of them are early to be feen ; other years very few, and thofe 
not till late in the winter : which variation, as to the time of their 
appearing, is caufed, as I fuppofe, by the different degrees of cold in 
the different winters. The earlieft appearance of this bird that I 
have obferved, was on the 26th of Oftober, and the lateft of my 
feeing it was the 8th of April. 

Turdus iliacus — the Red fVing. 

This bird is alfo very uncertain as to the time of its firfl appear- 
ance, but feems to be later in its vifit than the foregoing ; for, ac- 
cording to my journal, the 14th of December is the earlieft of its 
appearance, and in general I did not fee it till January or February. 
In March and the beginning of April, when the weather is fine, 
the Red Wings affemble together on the tops of high trees, and fmg 
very melodioufly ; foon after which they leave us, the 13th of April 
being the lateft of my feeing thefe birds. 

Rallus Crex — the Land Rail. 

The firft appearance of this bird I cannot fpeak to with any 
great certainty, having feldom met with it before the feafon for 
fhooting Partridges, September ; though it has twice made its ap- 
pearance in Auguft, once on the 24th, and the other time on the 
27th. And how long it continues with us is alfo uncertain; 
though I do not recoUeft ever to have feen it fo late in the year as 
November. That it is a bird of paffage, and that its ftay with us 
is ftiort, is moft probable; for it does not breed here, and cer- 
tainly leaves us before the winter commences. From its generally 
flying very flow, and to all appearance weakly, one would fuppofe 
it ill adapted to long and quick flight : but that it can exert itfelf 

on 



on the Migration of Birds. 125 

on occafion, I have been an eye witnefs ; having feen it fly with 
amazing fwiftnefs, equal to that of any Hawk : it alfo runs very 
feft. 

Fringilla Spinus — the Sijkin^ or Aberdavine. 

This little bird was obferved only in the years 1768, 1769, 1774, 
1780 and 1781* It is undoubtedly a bird of pafTage, fpending a 
fhort time with us early in the fpring, probably in its paffage from 
one country to another, as it neither breeds with us in fummer, nor 
appears here in the winter. I never faw it before the 5th of April» 
nor after the 30th of the fame month. I obferve it feeds on the 
feeds which are in the cones of the fin— With us it is called the 
Barley-bird, from its appearing about the time of fowing barley, and 
continuing with us no longer than the barley-fowing lafts. 

Mr. Latham fays it is not unfrequent in England in the winter* 
With us it is feldom feen at all. I never faw it in the winter. The 
longeft flay I ever obferved it to make, was from the loth to the 
30th of April in the year 1780. 

Lanius CoUurio — the red-backed Butcher Bird. 

This bird breeds with us, and generally appears about the 9th 
or loth of May j having never been feen by me earlier than the 9th 
of May, and one year I did not fee it till the 7th of June. 

MotacillaPhoenicurus — theRed/lart. Mot.Trochilus — Willow Wren. 
Mot. Sylvia — White Throat. Mot. Oenanthe — Wheat Ear^ and Mot. 
Lufcinia — Nightingale. 

Thefe fmall birds generally appear pretty early in April, and 
continue to maketheir appearance till September, fometimes rather 
later, as I have feen the Wheat Ear and Willow Wren in October. 
The fame temperature of the air in the fpring, which invites the 

flies 



ia5 Mr. MakkwickV Obfervations 

flies and other fmall infefts to come forth, brings thefe birds to 
feed on them. But whether they come out from their hiding places, 
as the infefts do, or whether they come from far diftant countries, 
is a queftion not yet determined by naturalifts. Probably the life 
of infers is terminated with the fummer, and the infeAs of the 
following year are produced from eggs, which are hatched by the 
warmth of the fpring: but no naturalift ever afferted that this was 
the cafe with birds. Their life is certainly prolonged from year 
to year ; but how they difpofe of themfelves during the winter, is 
the queftion. I never faw thefe birds in the winter, the earlieft of 
my feeing any of them being on the 13th of March, when I faw the 
Wheat Ear. 

Mufcicapa Grifola — the Ply Catcher. Mot. Atricapilla — Black Caf. 
and Mot. Rubetra-— ^i&/>r Chat. 

Thefe birds appear fomewhat later than the foregoing, but I 
never faw any of them in the winter. 

I will here beg leave to mention a few particulars refpefting 
other birds which have engaged my notice : the white Water- wag* 
tail, the grey Water-Wagtail, and the yellow Water-wagtail. 

How the Water-wagtails difpofe of themfelves in the winter, is 
the moft difficult to account for of any birds I know ; for though 
the generality of them difappear in the autumn, yet they are often 
fcen in the middle of winter. If there happens to be a fine day, and 
the fun {hines bright, thefe birds are fure to make their appearance, 
chirping brifkly, and feemingly delighted with the fine weather: 
whereas* perhaps, they had not been feen for three weeks or a 
month before. In ftiort they are never feen in winter but on a fine^ 
day. Where do they come from ? Certainly not from a far diftant 
country ; there not being time for a very long journey in the 

fpacc 



M tbe Migration of Birds. 127 

fpace of a fingk day ; and befides^ they never feem to be tired or 
lifelefs^ but are very brKk and lively. 

Sterna Hirundo & Sterna minuta — Sea Swallows. 

Thefe birds are, as I fuppofe, fummer birds of paffage; appearing 
on our fea-coafts about April or May, and cx^ntinuing with us tiH 
the autumn* The earlieft that I have obferVed the great Sea Swal- 
low, Sterna Hirundo, was the 15th of April ; the leffer, or Sterna 
minuta, the 24th of April; and the black Sea Swallow, Sterna fifli- 
pes? is fo rare, that in fixteen years I obferved it but once, and that 
was on the 28th of April. 

As to the time of their leaving us, I cannot fpeak with any cer^- 
tainty. I once faw the leffer Sea Swallow fo late as the 1 5th of Odtober. 

Motacilla Atricapilla — the Black Cap^ 

Sings very prettily, and has a note foinewhat like the Nightingale; 
for when I firft heard it, I took it for that bird, till I had feen it. 

Charadrius Oedicnemus— /iS^ Stone Curlew^ 

Whittles in the evening* I heard this bird June 17th, 1770, 
amongft the corn on the downs not iu from Eaftboura, where I 
fuppofe it breeds. 

Corvus Cov2Xr^the Raven. 

There feems a wonderful antipathy between this bird vkI tbje 
Corvus frugilegus, or Rook. In the year 1778, as foon as a Raven 
had built her neft in a tree acyoining to a very numerous rookery, 
all the Rooks^ immediately fbrfodc the fpot, a»l have not returned 
ta build there fince. 

At the BiQiop of Chichcftei's rookery at Broomham near Haft- 

ings in SuiTex, upon a Raven's building her neft in one of the 

2 trees, 



128 Mr. MarkwickV Obfervations 

trees, all the Rooks forfook the fpot; but they returned to their 
haunt in the autumn following, and built nefts there the fucceeding 
year. When this circumftance took place, the good Bifhop was 
very ill. The flight of the Rooks (for at firft the caufe of it was 
not known) was confidered by the country people as ominoufly 
portending the death of the poffefTor. However, his Lordfliip hap- 
pily recovered ; and, in the mean time, the flight of thefe poor 
prophets was better accounted for, 

Motacilla Regulus— //ii^ golden^crowned Wren. 

This bird, though the fmallefl: of any except the humming-bird, 
and to appearance the mofl: delicate, is yet hardy enough to endure 
the cold of our fevereft winters ; for it is now (January 26th, 1 776) 
the feverefl: weather I ever remember^ and yet it is chirping before 
me. 

Before I conclude this article, I will beg leave to mention a few 
birds, found in my neighbourhood, which are rarely met with. 
And-I do this the more readily, as I am defirous of affording evi- 
dence of the fouthern fituations in which they have been taken. 
They are the Scolopax lapponica, the fmall Curlew ^ or red-breajied 
Godwit; the Tringa Glareola, or brown-f potted Sandpiper \ the 
Ampelis garrulus, or Chatterer \ and the Fringilla Montifringilla, or 
Bramhling. 

The Tringa Glareola has never been figured by any author. I 
made a drawing of it from a frefli fpecimen, with the following 
defcription. 

Tringa Glareola — the Brown-fpotted Sandpiper. 
The Wood Sandpiper. Latham^s Synopjis^ vol. iii. p. 172, fp. 13. 
Tringa (Glareola) roftro l«vi, pedibus virefcentibus, corpore fufco 
albo pundlato, pe6i:ore albido. Linn. Syfi. Nat. vol. i. p. 250. 

Tringa 



pn the MfgratfQH of Birds^ 1*9 

Tringa nigra albo puncStata, pe<Store iiiaculat09 abdomine fubal^ 
bido, pedibus virefcentibus. Fn. Suec^ 152. 

Tringa. Brijfon^s Ornithologia^ vol. ii. p. 259. 

This bird was fliot by the fide of a little frefti- water rivulet 111 
the parifh of Battle, and fent me by a friend. I do not find (t men* 
tioned by any author except Linnaeus ; who, in his Syftema Na- 
turae, feems to think it only a variety of the Tringa Ochropus, or 
Green Sandpiper : but, in his Fauna Suecica, he takes notice of it 
as a diftindl fpecies, calls it Tringa Glareola, and defcribes it as fol- 
lows, which agrees with the bird that was fent to me : *^ Magni- 
tudo Stumi, dorfum fufcum albo pnn6tatum, uropigium album, re- 
miges fufcae, prima rachi nivea ; fecundariae apicis margine albac, 
re6trices fafciis albis fufcifq; laterales magis albae, minufq; fafciatae, 
abdomen albidum.'* He alfo fays, ** Habitat in fylvis uliginofis.^ 

This bird is rather more than nine inches .in length from the 
tip of the bill to the end of the taiU and near a foot and a half 
from tip to tip of the wings when extended. Its bill is fmooth, 
black, an inch and a half long. The noftrils are long, and 
placed near the head, and each mandible has a furrow running 
along it, more than half way from the head. From the bill to 
each eye there goes a blackifh line, and over each eye is a 
white fpace, and it is whitifh under the chin. The top of the 
head, neck, and breaft, are of a brownifti afti-colour ftreaked, efpe- 
cially on the breaft and cheeks, with a darker brownifti afti-colour. 
The back is of a dufky brown, tinged a little with olive-colour, and 
marked pretty thick with fmall whitifti fpots. The rump and co- 
vert feathers of the tail are white. The tail confifts of twelve fea- 
thers, marked with dark^coloured or blackifti and white bars, but 
the two outermoft are almoft entirely white ; and the nearer they 
are to the outfide, the more white they have. The quill feathers 
of the wings are all over of a dark dufky brown colour, and the 

S covert 



130 Mr. Markwick*^ Ohferoalims M Birds. 

covert feathers of a dulky brown tinged with olive-colour, thofe 
next the back being marked Mdth fmall whitifh fpots. The legs and 
feet are of a greenifh colour, and naked above the knees. The toes 
are long, the outermoft joined to the middle one by a membrane as 
fer as the firft joint. The claws are black* 

Tab. XL reprefents the Tringa Glaredia foiticwhat lefs than 
the life. 



XIII. The 



ZinnJywif,!. tab.U . f .160, 




Q^?^f/^f/^a u //r/'ro/a . 



-! 



( '31 ) 



XIII. ^be Hyiory and D^fcriptionof a new Species ofFucus. By Thomas 
IVoodwardj Efq. Fellow of the Linnean Society. 

Read jfpril 7, 1789. 

A PL A NT belonging to the order of Algae of the Crypto- 
garoia claCs of Linnaeus^ and fuppofed to be a non-defcript . 
Fucus^ has been long found in great quantities on the beach at 
Yarmouth, amongft other reje6tamenta of the fea. A fpecimen of 
this was fent fome years ago by Mr/Pitchford to the late ingenious 
Mn Lightfoot, whofe knowledge of this clafs of plants was un- 
doubtedly great, and whofe judgment defervedly held in the higheft 
efteem. In anfwer to Mr. Pitchford's enquiries, Mr. Lightfoot de- 
clared that the ^lant..\vas new to him, and wks not, as he believed, ^ 
defcribed in Mr. Hudfon^^FKra^nglica, or by any author with 
which he was acquainted; but, till it could be found in fruAification, 
nothing could be pofitively afcertained concerning it. On the ar- 
rival of the Linnean Herbarium in England, I carried a fpecimen 
to London, and compared it, along with my worthy and learned 
friend, in whofe poffeflion the Herbarium now is, with the fpe- 
cimens of Fuci there preferved; but we found none that at all cor- 
refponded with it. In this ftate it refted, it not being ever known 
from whence the plant, though fo frequent on the Yarmouth beacb^ 
was waflied ; when in the month of October, 1787, I vifited Gro*' 
mer, on the north-eaft coaft of Norfolk, with a view of examining 
what fea-plants grew on the rdcks there, as they are called by the 

S 2 inha- 



132 Mr. WooDWARD'i Defcrtption of 

inhabitants. Thefe rocks are formed of fea-pebbles and other large 
ftones, which are thrown up by the waves on that expofed (hore in 
immenfe quantities, and are agglutinated by the fea-flime into 
mafl'es of various fizes ; thefe are left dry by the recefs of the tide 
to a confiderable diftance. The furface is very unequal, and con- 
fequently numerous ponds of fait water, various in fize and depth, 
are feen amohgft them ; and as thefe in a calm day arc perfe6lly 
clear and pellucid, the fea-plants growing on the (tones are there 
exhibited in great beauty. Amongft others I obferved great plenty 
of the above-mentioned plant ; fo much, that I had reafon to 
conclude, that the principal part of what was found on the beach 
at Yarmouth, and elfe where to the fouthward, was wafhed from 
this part of the coaft. I fearched for its fruftification, but in 
vain ; and therefore contented myfelf with obferving its mode of 
growth^ without thinking of making any particular defcription of 
the plant. In the following winter I received fome fpecimens of 
marine plants, frefli from the fea, from Mr. Wigg, fchool-mafter, ^ 
at Yarmouth ; to whom we are obliged for the difcovery of many 
rare and fome new fpecies of Algae, and who deferves the warmed 
applaufe for his induftry in colle6ling, and fagacity in afcertaining 
numerous plants, almoft unaffifted by books. Amongft thefe I was 
equally furprifcd and pleafed to find this plant in a ftate of frufti- 
fication, and ftill more to obferve, on examination, that the fru6lifi- 
cation was particularly curious, and unlike that of any fpecies of 
Fucus hitherto defcribed. It being now clearly afcertained that 
this is a non-defcript Fucus, it may be diftinguillied by the name of 

Fucus fubfufcus. 
Fronde filiformi, ramofiffima, ramis ramulifque fparfis, foliis 
fubulatis fubalternis, frudtificationibus paniculatis, capfulis fub- 
oiSlofpermis. 
Place in the genus, next to Fucus filiquofus. 
Hab. Cromer on the coajl of Norfolk. Duration ©? 

DESCRIP-. 



a new Species of Fucus. I33 



DESCRIPTION- 

THE plant adheres to the ftones under the furface of the 
water, without any vifible root, immediately branching into nume- 
rous ftems. Individual frons about fix inches high, the fize of fmall 
twine, round, and rough towards the bafe with the remains of 
broken branches ; the lower -part of the principal branches having 
the fame appearance* Branches numerous, growing without order ; 
towards the fummit much crowded ; nearly the fize of the ftem : 
thefe again branched in a fimilar manner ; the laft clothed with 
fhort fubulate leaves, growing in a fubaltemate order, but not 
regularly. 

The frudtification is fituate in the bofom of the leaves and of 
the fmaller branches, on (hort fruit-ftalks, each of which appears to 
the naked eye to bear one or more capfules, about the fize of the 
fmalleft pin's head. Thefe capfules, viewed with a good common 
eye-glafs, have the appearance of flowers, confiding of feveral 
flefliy petals, much refembling the germina of the Sedums; but 
when moiftened with water and put under the microfcope, it ap- 
pears that they are compofed of feveral lanceolate capfules, on 
Ihort fruit-ftalks forming a panicle, or fometimes a fimple umbel ; 
each individual having the appearance of a filiqua, and containing 
fix or eight round fomewhat compreffed feeds, difpofed in two pa- 
rallel lines* Thefe feed-veflels appear to have neither valves nor 
diffepiment, nor are the feeds attached to any ligament ; therefore 
it is truly a capfule of one cell, and not either filique or legume. 

The colour of the plant is reddifh brown, or fubfufsous, when 
frefh; when dry it is nearly black ; but if moiftened, or held1)efore' 
a ftrong light, the real colour may be obferved. The capfules are 
pale and femi-tranfparent, the feeds the colour of the plant. 

When 



134 ^** \yQO»WAR»'i Tiefcnpionf &c. 

When dry it ftirinks from the fize of fmall packthread to that of 
coarfe thready and the branches io proportion. 

By its being fo conftantly found on the beach in winter, I fhould 
fuppofe its duration annual, and its time of flowering the autumn, 
being in feed in winter. 

REFERENCE TO THE FIGURE. Tab. 12. 

Fig. I. A fmgle ftem complete. This is the reprefentatipn of 9 
^ried fpecim^n,, of a young and perfectly vigorous plant, but not in 
a ftate of fru<5lificatiQu. Whon older, many of the fiAaUenbraochw 
and le,aves are brokcifi off, giving the plant a more nak«d appear-r 
ance — natural fige* 

a. A fmall branch of another dried fpecimen, with the frujftifif 
cation— natural fize. 

3. A part of ditto, magnified* The leaves and ends of the 
branches, when highly magnified, appear (lightly bifid, but not fo 
exa6tly or regularly as the figure reprefents. Whether this be the 
real growth, or only owing to accidental breaking by the waves, I 
could not afcertain; but it was the. fame in all the branches which 
I examined, and is therefore probably natural, 

4. Different appearances of the fructification. 

5. A fingle capfule very highly magnified, and fhewing the feeds 
as naturally difpofed. This is reprefented in the figure rather too 
broad, and too acutely pointed. 



XIV. Account 



1 



( 135 ) 



XIV. Account of a Jingular Conformation in the IVmgs offome Species of 
Moths. By Mr. Efprit Giornay of Turin^ Foreign Member of the hin^ 
nean Society. 

Read June 2y 1789- 

Veniet tempus quo ifta, quae nunc latent, in lucem dies extrahat. 

Linn, in IntroUu ad Sjift* fjat* 

MEPRISEE dans les tems anciens, rEntomologie doit, on peut 
dire, fa naiflance dans le fiecle pafle aux foins des Aldrovands, 
des Mouffets, des Rays, &c. et fon accroiffement dans celui-ci aux ex- 
periences et aux erreurs de Goedart* Get obfervateur patient, en 
parcourant la vafte for^tde la nature prefquefans experience, et fans 
guide ^, s*eft fouveht 6gare; 11 a pris des efFets pour des caufes, et a 
donn6 comme carafteres des marques, qui n'etaient qu'accidentelles. 
Mais fes erreurs piquerent la curiofite des favans ; on voulut s*af- 
furer de ce qu'il avait avance, oft obferva, on fit des experiences, 
et chacun s'eft empreffe a publier fes obfervations, et fes decou- 
vertes. 

Cette fcience cependant etait encore dans fon enfance il n'y a que 
quinze ans: In incunabilis adhuc tenerajacety difait Fabricius en 1775 f: 
mais le penchant de Tefprit humain pour la nouveaut6, le champ 

* Les auteurs qui Font precede ont travaille beaucoup; mais leurs ouvrages, prefque fans 
ordre, et fans fyfteme, encore ne pouvaient fervtr de guide fur aux obfervations de Goedart. 
t In Prolegomcnis ad Syftcma Entomoldgi*. Flenfturgi, 1775, 

5 vafte 



136 Mr» GloKWA^i Account of 

vafte que cettc matiere ofFre pourles decouvertes, fon am6nite, ct Tuti- 
lite qu'clle laifle cntrevoir par fon Stroke liaifon avec la Phyfique, la 
Chymie, et T Agriculture, ont engage beaucoup de perfonnes a en 
cntreprendre 1 etude, et lui ont merite Tattention des plus favana 
perfonnages de TEurope ; de forte qu'aujourdhui elle grandit a vue 
d'oeil par les travaux innombrables de fes amateurs, comme il a etc 
force douze ans apres de Tavouer le' meme Fabricius, Eniomologia inge- 
nio^Jiudtoque mult or urn nutritay nunc in vegetiorem at at em lata feflinat *. 

11 eft done de Tinteret commun de la focicte litteraire ; il eft du 
devoir meme de chaque individu qui s'applique a quelque brancl\e de 
la phyfique, de faire part aux autresde fes travaux, et de leurs reful- 
tats ; et c'cft pour remplir autant qu'il eft en moi ce devoir, que je 
vicns vous ofFrir, MefTieurs, ce que Tetude de la nature m*a fait de- 
couvrir de nouveau a Tegard des infedles. 

En m occupant depuis quelques annees, par go6t et par amufe- 
ment, a Thiftoire naturelle, j'ai pu obferver qu'il y a beaucoup d*ef- 
peces inconnues encore dans les,infe6les, et que d'un autre c6te Ics 
auteurs fe font plus a les multiplier en donnant pour differences d'ef- 
peces, celles qui n'etaient que de fexe, ou des fimples varietes. Si les 
circonftances repondent a mes defirs, j'aurai I'honneur de vous 
communiquer, Meflieurs, mcs remarqucs fur ce fujet; je ne vous en- 
tretiendrai dans ce moment que de la decouverte d'un caraftere 
qui m'a frappe dans la plupart des Sphynx et des Phalenes. 

Si e'en eft une, je ne puis mieux Tadreffer qu'a la fociete qui ne 
s'eft propofee pour but, que de decouvrir et d etaler aux yeux du 
public les trefors de la nature, et de rendre immortels les ecrits et le 
nom du perc, et reftaurateur de Thiftoire naturelle, le grand 
Linne. 

11 eft etonnant, que parmi tant d'obfervateurs attentifs et clair- 

* In Prsfat. ad Mantiilani Infe<5torun:i. Hafniae, 1787. 

voyans 



the Wings offome Species of Moths. 137 

voyans, qui nous ont detaill6 jufqu'au moindre des inteftins d'un in- 
feiSle; il eft etonnant, dis-je, que leur foit fechapp^e dans les Sphynx 
ct dans les Phalenes une partie exterieure fi vifible, et fi frappante 
telle que celle que j*entreprends de vous decrire. 

Un cara6tere inefFa9able de la bonte et de la fageffe du Createur 
eft empreint dans toute la nature : le moindre infe6te partage fes 
foins et m^rite fa prevoyance. Les Papillons deftines a voltiger dou- 
cement de fleur en fleur pendant le jour dans la campagne ouverte, 
ct fournis d*ailes tres-larges a leur bafe, furtout les inftrieures, n'ont 
a craindre aucun deplacement de celles-ci dans leurs courfes, et font 
fuffifamment garantis de tout accident f^cheux de ce cote-la: mais les 
Sphynx, et nombre de Phalenes, dont les ailes font tres-^troites a 
leur bafe, qui volent la nuit avec beaucoup de rapidite, et prefque 
toujours dans des broufTailles, il 6tait tr^s-facile, qu'en heurtant con- 
tre quelque obftacle leurs ailes fe derangeaffent en paffant les iniin^ 
cures par deffus les fup^rieures; et Panimal embarrafle par cet accident 
pourrait tomber, et fe perdre dans Therbe, dans des branches, ou 
dans Teau, ou devenir la proie de fes ennemis. L^Auteur de la na- 
ture a pourvu a cet inconvenient; il a muni les ailes de Tanimal d'une 
bride qui les retient a leur place fans les gener dans le voL 

De la bafe de Taile de deffous fort une pointe vers fa partie ante- 
rieure, plus ou moins longue felon la groffeur de Tinfefte, de nature 
cruftac6e, dure, daftique et refiftante, deftinee a foutenir Taile fupe- 
rieure k fa place, que j'appellerai pour cela Rejfort ou Appui (Fulcrum). 
Cette pointe fait un angle avec le bord de Taile inferieurc a peu pres 
de 15 jufqu'a 30 degres *, comme vous pouvez le voir par la figure 

* Cet angle eft celui que j'ai obferve dans les infe£tes deflech^s avec les ailes etendues, 
dont les bords exterieurs de celles de defTus font a peu pres en ligne droite, de forte que 
cet angle eft a mon avis le meme que doit faire cette pointe avec Taile inferieure, lorfque 
Panimal vole. Du refte je consols que ce RefTort doit tenir a un mufcle, qui le regie a vo- 
lonte, ou felon le befoin de Pinfe£te ; et que lorfqu'il eft tranquille, cette pointe fe trouve 
couchee le long du bord de I'aile, et Tangle pour lors devient mil, 

T ire 



138 , Mr. GiornaV Account of 

ire (Tab. 13.) ci-jointe*: maiscen'eft pas tout> Meflicurs; rintelligence 
de vues du Createur fe manifefte encore davantage par uii anneau 
attache a la nervure principale de Taile fup^rieure* Get anneau 
(fig. 2.) deftine a recevoir ce reflbrt, le laiffant gliffer avec facilite, le 
tient dans fon afliette fans lui oter la liberte des mouvemens. 
. Cc fecond caraftere ne fe voit que dans les males; et il eft facile, 
felon mon idee, d'en deviner la raifon : Creatoris fapientijjtmi omnifci^ 
entia nil frti/lra creavit^ fed omnia artifciofjjime injiruxit\. Les males vo- 
lent beaucoup, et avec une tres-grande vitefle; il faut qu*ils parcou- 
rent de longues efpaces pour chercher les femelles, et remplir le 
grand but de la nature, et font par confequent tres-expofes aux dan- 
gers que, nous venonsde dire: les femelles au contraire, faites pour 
attendre les vifites des m^les, volent fort peu,'et lentement; ce grand 
foin de la nature leur ferait done inutile, auffi quelques-unes n'en ont 
point, et celles qui en font pourvues ne lont ni fi long, ni fi folide 
que les m^lcs ; et il n'eft compof(6 dans la plus grande partie que 
d'un paquet de plufieurs filets minces reunis enfemble. 

Voila un fyfteme: direz-vous, Meffieurs, qu'il eft facile d'en batir! 
Ceft une maladie uriiverfelle que la vanite produit, que Tamour 
propre fomente, et qui repand plus de brouillards que de clartc fur 
les connaiflances humaines. Les fyftemes dans les fciences font* 
comme les feux foUcts qui egarent et deroutent fouvent les voya- 
geurs. L'homme commence ordinairement par rever ; fon amour 
propre lui infinuc peu a pen qu'il a devin6 le fecret de la nature; il 
s*en flatte, il fe le perfuade enfuite, il fonde des experiences fur fon 

• La fig. ire (Tab. 13.) reprcfente une des ailes inferieurcs du Sphynx Convchuli rnUc^ 
avec le ReiTort ay bj qui fort de \i, bafe de cette aile. La fig. 2de fait voir le meme Sphynx 
par deflbus, avec les ailes etendueS) ou Ton voit Tanneau d^ qui revolt le Reflbrt i, Cy commc 
il eft naturellement dans ranimal. 

f Linn. Amoen. Academ. vol. iii. p. 253. 

fyfteme. 



the JVings iffome Species of Moths. 



^39 



fyft^me, au lieu de fonder fon fyft^me fur dcs experiences; il le d<S- 
bite enfin, et ce n'eft fouvcnt qu'un reve. 

Votre remarque eft tres-fenfee, Meffieurs j mais ce n'eft point un 
fyfteme que je vous ofFre; ce n'eft qu'une idec,une fimple conjedure. 
Rien dans le monde n'eft fait a I'hafard ; fedin jinem cerium atque de-- 
terminatumy certamque ob caufam^ qu^ vel propagationi animalis infervit^ vel 
confervationi* . Or il m'a paru de Tentrevoir ce but de la fagcffe de 
Dieu dans le caraftere que je viens de vous decouvrir de ces in- 
fe6ies. Je vous expofe ce que j'en penfe, et c'eft a votre jugement 
que je foumets mes r6flexions. 

Voici les Sphynx et Phalenes que j'ai examines a cet egard; je vous 
Ics pr6fente felon Tordre de Linn6 ; je marque dans quelques-uns le 
longueur de ce Reffort en lignes prifes fur le pied de Londres. Je ne 
donne que le nom fimple de ceux que j'ai trouve manquer de cc 
caradlere. 

SPHYNX. 



I. ocellata« 

a. Tili«. 

3, Populi. 

4. Nerii. 



r Mile. Je n'en ai pas. 

1 Femelle. RefTort tres-court fans anneau. 

M. Reffort avec anneau. 



r M. Reffc 
IF. Jen 



en ai pomt. 



M. Reffort avec anneau. 



1 F. Je ne lui en ai point vu. 

^ , ,. f M. Reffort long. li. 4 avec \ ^ „„.,,. 
5. Convolvuh. I ^ j^^fj-^rt 1 4 f^ J I anneau. 

f. Ai- fM. Reffort 1. 3 f avec anneau. 

O. Atropos. I p Reffort en paquet de ao filets. 

p, J M. Reffort avec anneau. 

7. tlpenor. | p j^g^Q^j. pj^g ^ourt fans anneau. 

jj p ,, f M. Reffort avec anneau. 

». Forcelius. | p^ j^ ^^ j^- ^^ ^- p^-^^j. apper^u. 



• Linn. Amcen. Academ. vol. iii. pag. %^%. 
T 1 



ftclla- 



1 



140 



Mr. Giorna'x Account of 



9. ftellatanim. ( p* 

lOt Euphorbias. | ^ 

fM. 

11. fuciformis. \ F. 

12. Filipendulae. | p* 

fM. 

13. Phegea. \ F. 

14. caffra. I p[ 

15. Statices. I p^ 

16. pigm6e de la f M. 
collea d'Ernft. I F. 



Reflbrt avec anncau. 
RefTort en paquet de 4 filets. 

Reffort avec anheau. 
Je ne lui en ai point vu. 

Reffort avec anneau. 

Reffort en paquet de plufieurs ftlets fans 
anneau. 

Reffort avec anneau. 

Reffort en paquet de 10 filets fans anneau. 

Reffort feul fans anneau. 
Reffort en paquet de plufieurs filets tres- 
minces. 

Reffort avec anneau. 

Paquet de 5 filets fans anneau. 

Reffort avec alineau. 

Paquet de 4 filets fans anneau. 

Reffort avec anneau. 

Je ne lui en ai point obferve. 

P H A L iE N A. 
Attaci. 



17. Pavonia major. 

18. Pavonia minor. 

19. Tau. 

20. quercifolia. 

21. ilicifolia* 
•22. Rubi. 

23. Quercus. 

24. laneftris. 

25. Vinula. 

26. verficolora. 

27. Mori. 



Bombycis elingucs^ alts reverfis. 



f Wf. Reflbrt avec anneau. 

\ F. Paquet de plufieurs filets. 



28. Populi. 



the Wings of fom Species of Moths. 141 

a8. Populi. 
a8*. Neuftria. 

Bomhyces elingues, alis depre/^s, dorfo lavi. 

1^ . fM. Reflbrtdel. li avec anneau. 

aj. i^aja. | ^ j^^^^^.^. ^^^ anneau. 

villica >[^* ^^^^"^ ^® 1* ^* ^'^^^ anneau. 

2 * If. Petit paquet prefque imperceptible, 

•Y JM, ReiTort avec anneau. 

31. aupar. ^ p^ Paquet de 15 filets fans anneau. 

_ ^v i- 1 ^^ fM. Reffort avec 

32. Chryforrhaea. | p^ p^^^^^^ ^^^ ^^^^^^ 



M. Reffort avec anneau. 
F. Paquet fans anneau. 

M. Reffort avec anneau. 



QY • fM. Reffort avec anneau. 

33. baiicis, I p^ ^tn'di pas examine la fetnelle. 

Botttbyces elingucSy alis depreffisj dorfo cri/lato. 

jM 1 f M. Je n'en ai point. 

34. pudibunda. I p^ p^q^^^ j^ ^ fii^^g f^^g ^^^^^^^ 

n.- f M. Reffort avec anneau. 

35. gonoftigma. | p^ 

36. caeruleoce- f M. Reffort avec anneau. 

phala. 1 F. Paquet de 3 filets fans anneau. 

37. Coffus. 

38. palpina. 

Bombyces fptrilinguesy dorfo laviy alis dejkxis. 

. y J M. Reffort avec anneau. 

39. Aunca. ^ p^ Paquet de 5 filets fans anneau. 

40. Ruffula. J'en ai examine 6, que j'ai, et je les ai toutes trouv6es avec 

le reffort et I'anneau: feront-ce tous m^les? II y a une 
autre Phalene qui a les ailes un peu plus ^troites de 
couleur fauve fonc6e; les taches font precifement les 
memes que dans la pr6cedente; j'en ai obferve deux, 
que yai; je ne leur ai point trouve de reffort: no fe- 
rait-ce pas peut-^tre la femelle de celle-la ? 

41. grammica. 



14* Mr. GfoRNA'f Account of 

grammica I ^* Reffort avec anneau. 
^ * ° 'If. Paquet en filets fans anneau. 

Bomhycis fpirillngues^ dorfo crlflato^ alts deflexis. 

T 'K I- • I ^* Reffort avec anneau. 

42. I^ibatrix. I p^ p^q^^^ ^^^g anneau. 

2pr !• rM. Reffort del. 2 J fans anneau. 

43. i*-icuii. I p^ Paquet tres-court de plufieurs filets, 

NoUua fpirilin^ueiy dorfo laves ^ abffue crijla. 

, , T^^ • .1 f M. Reffort avec anneau. 

44. Dominula. | p^ p^^^^^ ^^ plufieurs filets. 

M^rQ J ^* Reffort avec anneau. 

45. Hera. ^ p^ p^^^^^. ^^ ^ ^j^^^^ 

46. Batis. Paquet en filets. Je n'en ai qu*unc feule, ct probable- 

ment c'eft la femelle. 

A» ^u^i,:^« f M. Reffort avec anneau. 

47. gl)Thica. I ^ p^^^^ ^^ ^ ^1^^^^ 

^Q T /- K^^ J^' Reffort avec anneau rouge tres-el6gant. 
45. jacoDeae. | p^ p^^^^^. ^^ plufieurs filets. 

or I ^- Reffort de 1. 2i avec anneau. 

49. bponla. I p^ j^ ^^ j,^. p^g examinee. 

..^ xT„,.4.^ f M. .Reffort avec anneau. 

50. Nupta. I p p^q^^^ j^ ^ ^j^^^^ 

.., 15^ ^ u fM. Reffort tres-gros a proportion avec anneau. 

51. Pronuba. | p^ Paquet de 3 llets. 

^ j^ . . fM. Reffort avec anneau. 

<2. rraxini. ^ T:^ t i* * 
^ 1 F. Je ne lai pas. 

r^ nut^rr,*.;. f M. Je n'en ai point. 

53. Chryfitis. I p^ J,^^^^^ j^ ^j^^^^^^^ ^^^^3^ 

^.. ^«4.:^„i^r f M. Reffort avec anneau. 

54. meticulofa. | p^ p^^^^^ ^^ ^^^^^^ 

55. gothica. Reffort avec anneau. Je n'en ai vu qu'une feule; il 

y a apparence que c'eft le m^le. 

Geomctra 



the Wtngs offome Species of Moths. 143 

Geometra peBinat^^ alts pofiicisfubangulofis. 

56. la£tearia. 

57. vcrnaria. 

58. Thymiaria. 

Geometra peStinicornes^ alts rotundatis. 

.' rM. Reffort avec anneau. 

59. purpuraria. | ^^ p.^^etde 20 filets. 

60. pufaria. 

61. papilionaria. 

Geometree feticornes^ alts rotundatis. 

62. clathrata. 

63. bilineata. 

^^ r'-^4.^^o«.o X ^' Reffort avec anneau. 

64. Cratacgata. , | p^ p^^^^^. ^^ ^^^^^^ 

Tinea. 

65. pufiella. Reffort avec anneau. Je n'en ai qu'unc* 

£.ii i> ^11 r M- Reffort avec anneau. 

66. Evonymella. | p^ p^^^^^ ^^^^ ^„„^^^^ 

On voit par cette lifte que, parmi les Sphynx que j*ai obferves, il 
n*y a que celui du peuplier, qui foit depourvu de ce Reffort. Cela me 
confirme toujours plus dans mon opinion. Le Sphynx du peuplier 
eft des plus tranquilles que je connaiffe ; il vole rarement; et c*eft 
celui qui a les ailes a proportion les plus larges : d'ailleurs le port 
feul dc fes ailes marque Tinutilite d'un tel moyen pour les retenir a 
leur place: les ailes de deffous, lorfqu'il eft en repos, depaffent toujour^ 
celles de deffus. ' La meme reflexion a lieu pour toutes les Phalenes, 
que vous trouverez qui manquent de ce Reffort, telles que la Pavo- 
nia major, minor, Tau, QuercifoHa, &c. 

Ce caraft^re ne pourrait-il pas faciliter la claffification d'ailleurs fi 

cmbrouillee encore dans les Lepidopteres, et furtout dans les Pha- 

lenes ? Les halteres ne font-ils pas une claffe dans les infe6les ^deux 

5 ailes 



I 



144 Mr. GiornaV Account of 

ailes felon Scopoli*? Cette partie du moins eft bien plus fenfible que 
celles de la bouche, fur lefquelles eft fonde le fyft^me de Fa- 
bricius. 

Mais fi cette partie ne fuffit pas pour ^tablir une claffe, elle pourra 
du moins nous fervir pour diftinguer le fexe, qui eft encore douteux 
dans plufieurs de ces infeftes ; aufli m'a-t-elle deja eclaire fur Ic 
doute dans lequel nous laiffent Ics auteurs, et nomm^ment la Col- 
leftiondes Papillons d'Europe parErnft a Tegard du Sphynx ^ ailes 
tranifparentes (fuciformis). II y en a de deux fortes; un a le bord 
des ailes couleur de marron ainfi qu'une bande a travers le ventre; 
Tautre a cette bande noire avec le bord des ailes verdatre-obfcur; ils 
font parfaitement femblables dans le refte. La plfipart des auteurs 
ont pris cette difference comme la diftindlion de fexe; d'autres ont 
doute fi e'en 6tait une d'efpece: cette derniere opinion eft la vraie; 
j'en ai trouv6 de toutes les deux fortes avec le refTort et anneau, et 
avec le refTort fans anneau ; done il y a m^le et femelle dans toutes 
les deux, et font par confequent deux efpeces difFerentes. Ce fera une 
fimple vari6t6, vous me direz, Meffieurs; mais cela ne pent etre; car 
vous m'enfeignerez que les variet^s fe rencontrent rarement, or ces 
deux Sphynx font auffi frequens les uns que les autres. 

Le refTort des femelles eft compofe dans la pl^part d'un paquet 
de filets, comme je vous Tai fait obferver ci-defTus: ce paquet eft re- 
tenu dans les Phalenes par une toufFede poils, qui partent de la feconde 
nervure de I'aile fup6rieure, et font recourbes vers le bord ext^rieurf; 
mais le nombre de ces filets n'eft pas le meme dans toutes les ef- 

* Entomolog. CarnioL Ord. vi. Halterata, clavula fub fingulis alis. 

t Voyez la fig. 3. (Tab. 13.) Elle reprefentela femelle de la Phalene Pronuba vue 
en defibus. D'un cote elle manque de Taile fuperieure pour laifTer voir le paquet a compo- 
fe de 3 filets bien diftin6is et un peu groi&s au microfcope ; et de Tautre cote on voit ce 
paquet b, c^ qui repofe fur la toufFe de poils d. L'aile detacbee «, fait voir que ce paquet 
fort de la bafe de Taile. 

peccfi 



linnSntw.I. tab . /.'? .p . J 44 




1 1 curJc/'^irrjA^ i nj { 



n 



the JVin^s of ftveral Species of Moths. 145 

peccs (autre renwyrquc A faire)* Daps Ics infeftes que j'a,i, obfery^s 
avec le micxofcopCf je Tai trouv6 de 3 filets daijs les uns^ de 4 dans 
d'autres, de 5^ de 10, de 159. ^c« jufqwa ao, cpmme vpus I'aurez oN 
ferve par ma lifte* Ce nombre cependant en eft conftamnient le 
roeme dans tous les individus dp la meme efpece. Gette difference* 
oe me feroble, powrrait encore^novis fefyir dP giade pour nous tirec 
des labyrinthes de rentomologie* . 

La collection des papillons d'Europe d'Ernft nous donne unc 
quantity d'efpeces de Sphynx a ailes tranfparentes (Lmn. Leghima alts 
iniegris, ano barhato)^ comme audi de Sphynx beliers (Linn. Adfcitie 
babitu et larva droerfa\ Sont-elles v6ritablement toutes des efpeces^ 
ou ne font-elles que des fimples variet^s? Le nombre des filets qui 
fonnent le RefTort des femelles determin6' et toujours conftant d 
chaque efpece, ne fervirait-il pas d nous d^brouiller ce cahos? 
C'eft a vous, Meflieurs, 4 en jugen 

Vous qui pofledez des collections complettes, vous pouvez verifier 
mes obfervations, porter votre examen fur les Sphynx et Pha- 
lenes qui manquent dans ma lifte, et en tirer peut-^tre des notions 
plus heureufes que je ne faurai le faire. 



NOTE. 

THIS curious apparatus aflfixed to the wings of Moths, which 
Mr. Giorna confiders as a new difcovery, has been long known to 
many of the Englifti colle6tors of Butterflies and Moths : if is 
claimed (and a good account given of it with accurate figures) by 
Mr. Mofes Harris^ in a work of his, entitled, An EJfay preceding a Sup. 
plement to the Aurelian^ wherein are confideredthe Tendons and Membranes 

U of 



1 



146 Mr. Giorna'j Account^ &c. 

of the wings of Butterflies, &c. In this work the ufe and aftions of 
thefe fprings appear to be well defined and explained; and Mr. 
Harris obferves that it pertains only to the males, the females ha- 
ving, inftead of the fprings, four fmall hairs or briftles : it was 
thought, however, proper to publifh this account, as Mr. Gioma 
has carried the matter further than Mr. Harris, and it is hoped will 
excite others to purfue the fubjedt. 



XV. Oi/er-^ 



( 147 ) 



XV. Obfervations on the Language of Botany. By the Rev. Thomas 
Martyn^ B. D. F. R. S. Profejfor of Botany in the Univerfiiy of Cam* 
bridge J and Fellow of the Linnean Society. In a Letter 'addrejed to the 
Prefident. 

Read OSlober 6, 1789. 

SIR, 

I HAVE little doubt of your agreeing with me in opinion, that 
nothing has contributed more to the rapid progrefs which 
the fcience of Botany has made within the laft thirty or forty years, 
than the excellent language which Linnaeus invented, and which 
has been by common confent adopted, not only by thofe who follow 
. the fyftematic arrangement of the illuftrious Swede, but by all who 
ftudy Botany as a fcience. Without pretending to any peculiar 
forefight, we may venture to aflirm, that the Linnean language 
will continue to be in ufe, even though his fyftem fhould in after 
ages be neglefted ; and that it will be received into every country 
where the fcience of Botany is ftudied, with certain modifications 
adapting it refpe6tively to each vernacular tongue. 

So long as Botany was confined to the learned few, there was 
no diflSculty in ufing the terms of the Linnean language, exaftly 
as the author had delivered it: but now that it is become a ge- 
neral purfuit, not only of the fcholar, but of fuch as have not had 
what is called a learned education; and fmce the fair fex have 

U 2 adopted 



148 ProfeJJor MartynV Obfervations 

adopted it as a favourite amufement; it is become ncceffary to have 
a language that fhall be fuitable to every rank and condition, a Ian- 
gifage thit may be incorporated into the general fund, and carry 
with it the proper marks of the mother tongue into which it is to 
be received. 

In order to attain this defirable end, I beg leave, Sir, to fubmit to 
your confideration, and to that of the focicty over which you pre- 
fide, thefe t^yo fundamental principles : Firft, that we (hould adhere 
as clofely as pbflible'to the Linncati language itfelf : and fecondly, 
that we fhould adapt the terminations, plurals, compounds and 
derivatives, to the ftru6lure and genius of our fterling Englifh. 

That we ought to adopt tlie Linnean terms themfelves, is fuffi- 
ciently apparent from the great advantage refulting from the ufe 
of one univerfal language. If we change or tranflate thefe termsi, 
we lofe all this advantage, and become tinintelUgible to botaniftsof 
every other nation, without any benefit gdined on the other handD. 
for thefe new terms will be equally difficult even to the Englifh 
ftudent; and will require as much explanation as the Lktin or 
Greek, many of which have prefcjfiption and pofTeffion to plead ini 
their defence. To load the fd6nee and our Englifh tongue with a 
ufelefs addition of new words, is certainly an evil to be avoided. 

Thus, forinflance, in the parts of fruAification, if we adopt the 
terms empa/ement^ iloffbm^ chive^ thread, tipy pointalj fied^bud, Jbafty 
fummitj they require explanation, in their appropriate fenfe, as mucli 
as calyx, corolla, Jiamen, Jilatnent, anthera, ftflillum ox piJlU, gernten or 
germj fiyle and Jiigmay which are already familiar to the ears of all 
who have fludied the fcience of Botany, even though they have 
little or no acquaintance with the learned languages. For the fame 
reafons legume is to be preferred to Jhell or cod,Jiliqua or Jtlique to pody 
JiUcle to pouchy glume to hujkovcbqff^, culm to fir aw, digitate to fingered^ 
wate to egged, pinmtlfid to feather-clefts 

Some 



OH the Language of Botany. 149 

Some ffetvEnglifli terms, it muft be owned, were ufed by the 
learned Grew; fuch as empalementy chhe^femet for anther^ potntelU ovary 
iox germ^ ind knoh or button ioxJUgma: but thefe never made their 
way into the world, or became of general ufe. It is not neceflary 
therefore to difcufs the comparative merits of thefe terms with the 
Linnean ; fince, after all, we muft fubmit to the fupreme law in 
thefe matters, general confent*: and when a Greek or Latin term 
has been once fanftioncd by ufe, there can be no doubt but that it 
ought to be preferred even to a term originally Englifti, which is 
cither little known, or is applied to another fignification. 

It fcems therefore upon the whole to be a defirable obje6t, that 
all who talk or write of Botany in Engli{h» fhould keep as clofe as 
poflible to the Linnean language i nor does it feem liable to any 
material objeftion, if we proceed with difcretion and propriety^ 
without violating the rules of common fenfe or of grammar. 

For inftance, when there is a (ignificant Englifliterm, which has^ 
been in long and general ufe, it ought to be preferred* Thus it 
would be abfurd to put femen iorfeed^ ox folium for leaf: cell is pre- 
ferable to loculamenty partition to JiJJepiment^ and perhaps feed-vejfel to 
pericarp. Opinions will differ upon the extent to which this excep- 
tion to the general principle fhould be carried : but the original 
terms of the fcience in our language are fo few, that it may very well 
be confined within a fmall compafs. 

There are however cafes, in which it feems advifable rather to 
invent a new Englifh term, than to adopt the Linnean* Thus in 
the cafe of very long words, fuch as campaniform^ infundibuliform^ hy^ 
focrateriformy and other fefquipedalian terms, which give too great an 
air of pedantry to the language, it will perhaps be thought better by 



-** Si volet ufus^ 



M Q^em penes arbitriom eil:, et ju8>^ct norma loquend^*^ 

6 , moft 



150 Profejfor MartynV Obfervations 

moft perfons to yxithell-Jhaped^funneUJhaped^ ?Xi^falver^Jbaped\ or heU- 
form^ funnel-form^ and falverform ; our Englifh tongue admitting 
compounds with great fuccefs and facility : efpecially fince thefe 
terms convey immediately to the Englifh botanift a familiar idea of 
the fever al forms of the corolla, which they are intended to 
exprefs* 

When words alfo have already an appropriate fenfe in Engliih^ 
it feems better to tranQate them than to ufe the originals them- 
felves. Thus, although in Latin we fay caulis JlriSus or exafperatus^ 
zvA folium exafperatum\ yet it has an abfurd found in Enghfli to talk 
of 2^flridl or exafperated ftalk, and of leaves being exafperated. On 
the contrary, it is ftill worfe, although it has not fo ridiculous a 
found, to drop the original Latin term, in order to adopt an Eng- 
lifh one before appropriated to another fenfe, and therefore only 
tending to create confufion. What I mean may be exemplified in 
the terms lanceolate zaA ferrate^ applied to leaves : thefe are become 
fufEciently familiar by ufe; but if not, the explanation mufl be re- 
ferred to : whereas, if we ufe the words lanced zxidifawed, a novice 
might eafily be mifled ; for having been accuflomed to the ideas of 
a lanced gum and fawed wood, he will not readily apply the former 
to the fhape of a lance's head ; or the latter to the fharp notching 
round the edge of a leaf, rcfembling the teeth of a faw. 

There are likewife fome Latin words which do not perfeiSlly affi- 
milate to our language, and therefore are better tranflated. Such 
are teres and amplexicauUs* Now we cannot well fay in Englifh tere 
or amplexicaul; but the firft may frequently be tranflated round: this 
however will fometimes crei^te a confufion, and columnar gives the 
idea of teres moft precifely ; for when applied to a flem, or any of 
its fubdivifions, it fignifies, not a cyUndriq, but a tapering form, like 
the fhaft of a column. The fecond of thefe terms may be* rendered, 
lignificantly enough, embracing ox Jlem^clafping. 

Thefe 



en the Language of Botany. 151 

Thcfe and other exceptions, which will readily prefent them- 
fclves to any one who confiders the fubjeft, being admitted ; the 
advantage of the fcience will be moft effe6lually confulted by re- 
taining the Linnean terras, whenever there is no cogent reafon to 
the contrary. It is frequently even dangerous to fubftitute equi- 
valent terms; or at lead it requires the utmoft caution, if we would 
avoid confuiion. Thus, if we tranflate the two Linnean terms deci-^ 
duus and caducus by the fame Englifti ^otd fallings two diftindl ideas 
are confounded*: would it not therefore be better to ufe the two 
Latin terms, with an Engliih termination, deciduoi/j and caduc^i;^? 
Plumofus is rtndtxtA feathery \ and pinnatus^ feathered: but is not this 
confounding ideas totally diftinft? and are not therefore the terms 
flumous or rather plumofe^ and pinnated or rather pinnate^ to be pre- 
ferred ? Dichotomus may be tranflated ^orW: but this Englifli term 
implying no more than one divifion into two parts, does by no 
means fully exprefs the idea df a ftem continually and regularly 
dividing in pairs from the bottom to the top. Surely then dichofomousjr 
is preferable to forked . 

But where ftiall we find Englifli words to exprefs all the varia* 
tions of pubefcence, which Linnaeus has difcriminated with fo 
much nicety J ? Some of them indeed may very well admit of tranf- 

* Caducus fignifies a more quick or fudden falling oflF than diciduus. The calyx of the 
Poppy dropping before the corolla is unfolded, is faid to be caducus. In Berberisy and many 
plants of the clafs Tetradynamia^ it falls off^ but not till after the corolla is expanded : the 
calyx in this cafe is (aid to be deciduus. 

t If the jus it norma hquendi would permit, I (hould be for rendering all Latin ad]e<Etives 
ending in us^ by the Engliih termination ous: and all fuch as end in ofusy by the termina- 
tion ofe. 

X As fcabriiieSf lanoy lanugo^ villus^ tomintumy piliy feta^ firigtty hamiy fiimuliy acutely 
furcayfpina^ ice, and the adje£tives derived from thefe and others ; as lanatusy lanuginofuSy 
vittofusy tonuntofusy pihfus, fetaaus^ ftrigojusy hamatusy aculeatusy funatusy fpinofus^ fiabery 
birtuSf bir/utusy hifpiduSy exafperatuSy &c» 

lation; 



15a Profeffor MartynV Obfervatms 

lation*; but many will not. For inftance, if we render y?4^fr-by the 
Englifh word roughs how fhall we diftinguifli it from afp^r^ which 
has the fame fignification ? We are therefore reduced to the ne- 
ceflity of rendering a/per j rough +; and of retaining moft of the 
other Latin terms with Englifh terminations, as fiabrous^ birfute^ 
bifpid^ &c, unlefs we would wantonly load the fcicnco of Botany^ 
and our Englifh tongue, with terms newly invented or applied^, 
which are not either more fignificant, or more eafy tq be underftoodf 
than thofe which we are already in poffefiion of. 

As to the fecond general principle, namely, that the terminations 
and plurals of our words, togethef with their compounds and dc;* 
rivatives, fhould be adapted to the flru^lure and genius of the 
Englifh language; it will not perhaps by many be thought of equal 
importance with the firfl. There is perhaps no language that is 
more irregular than ours, or that admits of more licenfe in many 
refpedts. 

This however is no reafon why, in the formation of new terms, 
we fhould not follow fuch fundamental rules as we have, avoid 
irregularities as much as pofTible, and add no frefh barbarifms to 
thofe which already difgrace us. The well known Horatian rule % 
muft be our conflant guide in the formation of our terminations 
and plurals; and analogy mufl be attended to in the flru6lure of 
our compounds and derivatives. Thus ne&ary may be ufed for 
neSlarlum^ pifiil for piftillumy Jiyk.ioxjlylus^ pericarp for pericarpium^ 
receptacle for receptaculum^ capfule for capfula^ glume for gluma^ culm 

• As lana wool, pili hdirs^ fet^ briftles, bMni Yiodkj^JlmuU ftings, acuki prickles, j^im 
thorns : Umatus may be rendered woolly, pilofus hairy, fetaceus briftly, bamatus hooked, 
moiUatui ^iiddj^Jpinofus thorny. 
f If foy in order to preferve the analogy, exafpert^s may be tranflated roughened f 
X " £t nora £i£bque nuper habebunt verba fidem, fi 
^ Graeco fonte cadant, parce detorta. 

for 



on the Language of Botany. 153 

for cuhnusy &c. Some of thefe words, as neSlarium and pericarpium^ 
are become fo familiar to learned botanifts, that they will perhaps 
hardly be perfuaded to give up the Latin termination. The final 
in a may be admitted more readily; and corolla having ufe on its fide, 
will doubtlefs be preferred by many to corol^ which has not fo melo- 
dious a found. Naturalifts talk familiarly of a butterfly's antenna i 
and cupola^ which in the laft century was confidered as a ftranger, 
is in this admitted to be a denizen. I muft obferve, however, that 
by changing the final a into e^ fome confufion will be avoided, 
which arifes from not diftinguifhing the Latin feminine Angular 
from the neuter plural; and by ufing Jlipule ioxjlipula^ we {hall no 
longer hear of a leaf-ftalk or petiole having twojiipula. 

But whatever allowance may be made in Angular terminations, 
the plurals muft certainly follow the analogy of the Englifh tongue; 
and if we tolerate corolla and anthera^ heSlarium and pericarpiumy we 
cannot poflibly allow of corolhe and anthera^ neSlaria and pcricarpta ; 
but we miaft ufe either corollas ox corols^ antheras or anthers^ neSlariums 
or nediariesj pericarpiums or pericarps^ according as we preferve the 
original term entire, or anglicize it. 

All derivatives and compounds ought to follow the analogy of 
the original words from which they are derived, or of which they 
^re compounded. Thus from corolw^ regularly form corollety as from 
crowny coronet : if we adopt the terms prickle and thorn^ we muft ufe 
the adje6lives prickly and thorny^ not aculeate 2indfpinofe : from glume 
we form glumo/e; from amenty amentaceous; from awn^ awned and 
awnlefsi from axil or axilla ^ axillary \ from pinna, pinnate^ hipinnatey &c. 
from calyx are formed calycle, calycledy calycine\ from petaly anther y 
berryy wje make the com^ownds Jive-petalledy anther-bearingy berry^ 
bearings not bacciferous; from celly two-celled \ from leafy two-kavedi 
ixomfeedy two-feeded. 

Without, however, entering too much into the minutenefles of 

X this 



154 Profejfor MartynV Obfervatlons, &c. 

this fubjeft, fufEce it to remark, that when we admit terms of art 
or fcience to participate in the rights of citizens, they fhould put on 
our garb, and adopt our manners. If this rule had always been ob- 
ferved, our language would not have been deformed with innume- 
rable barbarifms, which learned and unlearned ignorance have 
joined to introduce among us; and which nothing but the conftant 
habit of fpeaking or hearing them, can ever reconcile to our ears*. 
It would be eafy to add many more obfervations, but it is not 
my defign to exhauft the fubjc6l. I have addrefled thefe curfory 
remarks to you, Sir, as being at the head of a fociety, one of whofe 
principal views is to promote Englifh Botany ; in hopes that fome 
member of the fociety, who has more leifure than myfelf, may turn 
his thoughts to the fubje6t^ and handle it fo fully, that all of us 
who are engaged in the fame purfuit, may fpeak the fame language^ 

I am, 

Park Profpea, Wcftminftcr, g I R, &C. 

Odobcr 5, 1789. ' 

THO. MARTYN- 

• Such arc percent^ per-annum^ per-poundy and per-po/l; ipfofa^o^ mifiutta^ data^ errata^ 
in vacuo^ vice verfa^ plus et nunusy vis inertia^ in equilibrioy jeUd'eaUy aquafortis, aqua vita% 
ignis fatuusy ceteris paribus,- equivoque^ critiqueyje-ne-ffai'-quoiyffavoir'Vivrej outre j et cetera^ 
it cetera^ et cetera, — It fhould feem that the mercantile world, the learned world, and the 
fafhionable world, had formed a confpiracy to debafe our fterling Englifh by ill-made tcrm% 
afFededly introduced without the leaft neceflity. 



XVI. Oh- 



( 155 ) 



XVI. Obfervations on the Genus of Begonia. By Jonas Dryander^ M. A. 
Libr. R. S. and Member of the Royal Academy of Sciences ofStockholmp 
Fellow of the Linnean Society. 

Read November 3, 1789. 

THE Genus of Begonia was firft eftablilhed by Plumier, and 
publiftied in 1700 by Touraefort, in the. Appendix to his 
Inftitutiones Rei Herbarise, three years before the Nova Plantarum 
Americanarum Genera of Plumier appeared. From Tournefort, 
Linnaeus introduced it in the firft edition of his Genera Plantarum, 
among the Fragmenta, or fuch genera as were not fuflBciently de- 
fcribed to be referred to their proper claffes ; and in the fecond edi- 
tion it ftill remains in the Appendix: but in the fifth and fixth edi- 
tions he refers it to Polygamia Moncecia, though without any alte- 
ration in the defcription of the genus from that in the firft edi- 
tion. In the thirteenth edition of the Syftema Vegetabilium this 
genus firft found its proper place in the Linnean Syftem, which is, 
Moncecia Polyandria. 

Ludwig, in the firft edition of his Definitiones Plantarum (1737), 
introduces it very improperly in his fifth clafs, Plantae flore per- 
fe6lo fimplici regulari pentapetalo. But in the fecond edition 
(1747) he gives it in the Appendix, among Fragmenta varia; and 
Boehmer alfo in the third edition (1760) refers it to Plantae dubiae.. 

X 2 Linna^us^ 



156 Mr. DRrAKSBltV Obfervations 

Linnasus^ in his Ordines Naturales^ has ranged the Begonia in 
the fifth divifion of the twelfth order, Holoracese, with Polygonum, 
Rumex, and others. Erxleben, in his Anfangsgriinde der Natnrge- 
fchichte, has clafled it with nearly the fame plants in his forty-fe- 
cond order, called Vaginales; and Riiling, in his Ordines Naturales, 
has it in his thirty-third order, Polygona, which differs from Erx- 
leben's Vaginales only in fome of the genera referred to it. 

Adanfon, in his Families des Plantes, has joined it with a very 
different fet of plants, in his thirty-fecond family, which he calls 
Portulacae, Butjuffieu, in his Genera Plant arum fecundum Ordines 
naturales difpofita, jufl publifhed, has given it among Plantae 
incertae fedis; and juflly fays, ** Genus nuUi vere affine.'* 

When Plumier firfl determined the genus, he referred to it fix 
fpecies ; but the few words by which he diftinguifhed them, were 
not fufficient, in the prefent flate of Botany, to difcriminate fpecies. 
Whence Linnaeus, in his firft edition of Species Plantarum, having 
then probably never feen a Begonia, joined all the fpecies of Plu- 
mier, and one of Sloane, under the name of Begonia obliqua ; and 
in the fecond edition he added two more fynonyms, one from Rum- 
phius, and one from Browne : fo that in fa6l Begonia obliqua con- 
tained, under one trivial name, all the fpecies at that time known; 
and it is no wonder that this vague name has been applied by dif- 
ferent botanifts to almoft any fpecies of Begonia which occurred to 
them. Chevalier LanTarck in the Di£tionnaire Encyclopedique, and 
M. Jacquin in the firft volume of his Golleftanea, were the firft 
who attempted to bring this confufed genus into fome order; but 
neither of them had feen more than one fpecies, and were obliged 
to make out the reft merely from books. 

A fpecies of Begonia, which flowered in October laft year (1788) 
in Mr. Lee's garden at Hammerfmitb, made it neceflary for me to 
iludy the genus of Begonia, for the purpofe of determining that 

plant: 



M the Genus of Begoma. X57 

plant : and having an opportunity of comparing dried fpccimens of 
ieveral fpeciesi and the affiftance of defcriptions of fome of them 
made on the fpot by the late Doftors Solander and Koenig, befides 
the knowledge to be got from printed books, I was tempted to lay 
before the Society the refult of my refearches. Though I have feen 
fpeclmens of fifteen out of the twenty-one fpecies I have determined, 
^ftill many of them were not fo perfect in all their parts, as to enable 
me to give a fatisfaiftory account of them ; and the impoflibility of 
determining with certainty fuch flcfliy plants from dry fpecimens, 
makes it ftill more neceffary to offer this only as a (ketch of the 
imperfe6t knowledge we have of this genus, in hopes of inciting 
fuch botanifts, as may hereafter have an opportunity of examining 
the living plants, to fill up the chafms which ftill remain. It muft 
alfo be left to a future confideration, when the different fpecies 
fhall be better known, if it would not be more convenient to di- 
vide this natural genus into feveral artificial ones; as it is almoft 
impoffible to give a general defcription of the genus, there being fo 
great a variation in the parts of fruftification. 

Confcious of the impoffibility of making good figures from im- 
perfect dried fpecimens of fucculent plants, but ftill wifhing to give 
fome afTiftance to thofe who have no opportunity of feeing the fpe- 
cimens I have ufed, I have given the outline of a leaf of moft of 
the fpecies, which were not figured before; and alfo a figure of the 
fruit, when I had a perfeft one. 

There ftill remain feveral Begonias of which I have fame know- 
ledge, but not fufiicient to introduce them in this arrangement of 
the genus : thofe will be found in an appendix at the end, under 
the title of Species obfcurse. 

It will be neceffary to explain fome terms made ufe of in my 
fpecific differences : 

5 r'olium 



158 Mr» Drtander'j Ohfervatlom 

Folium inaqualiter cordatum^ cujus alter lobus major. (Maid obli^ 
quutn didlum, cum terminus hie dire6lioncm folii, non figu- 
ram, refpiciat) 
Foliumy^/w/V(?r^^///w, cujus alter lobus obliteratus. 
Capfulae ala paralkltZy dum alse margo exterior lateri capfulas pa- 
rallelus eft. 
Rotundatcey cum medio latiores. 
ObtufanguUy fuperne latiores, angulo rotundata 
Acutangulay fupernd latiores^ angulo acuto. 



BEGONIA, ^oum. Injl. 660. tab. 442. Lin. Gen. PL ed. L n. 901. 
ed. vi. n. 1156. Ludw. Def. Gen. 1737. p. 49. 1747. n. 1044. 
1760. n. 1266. Adanf. Fam. p. 244. Lam. Encycl. i. p. 393. 
Gartn. Sem. p. 156, tab. 31. Jujf. Gen. p. 436. 
(Dixit Plumier in memoriam D. Begon, Regi Galliae ab intimis 
confiliis et rei nauticae pracfe£ti in ora Santonum, cujus merita in 
rem herbariam me quidem latent.) 

♦ MafcuK Flores. 
Cal. nuUus. 

Cor. Petala quatuor (in odlopetala 6 — 9): quorum duo cppofita 
majora, plerumquc fubrotunda (in ferruginea omnia fubae- 
qualia oblonga). 
Stam. Filamenta numerofa (15 — too), receptaculo inferta, brevif- 
fima, interdum bafi coalita. Anthera oblongse, ereftse. 
* Feminei Floresj plerumque in eodem cum mafculis pedunculo 
communi. 
Cal. nuUus. 

CoR. Petala plurimis quinque, aliis (4, 7, 18, 19, 21) fex, aliis (8, 
16) forte quatuor, plerumque inaequalia. 

PiST. 



on the Genus of Begonia. 159 

Pist. Germen inferum, triquetrum, in plurimis alatum. StyJi ple- 

rifque tres, bifidi. Stigmata fex. 
Per. Capfula plerifque triquetra, alata, trilocularis, bad fecus alas 

dehifcens; aliis (5, 6) bilocularis; aliis (4^ 18) forte unilo- 

cularis» 

Charadler EJfentialis. 

Masc. Calyx tiXiXhxs. Ce?r5/&i polypetala. Stamina viMmtroi^,. 

Fem. Calyx nuUus* Corolla polypetala, fupera. Capfula alata, poly- 

fperma. 

Habitus Generis. 
Tota planta carnofa. 

Caulis plerifque herbaceus, fed fpecies quasdam acaules. 

Folia petiolata, in caulefcentibus alterna, 

Stipula ad bafin petiolorum binae. 

Pedunculi plerifque dichotomi, in caulefcentibus axillares. 

Locus Natalis. 
Inter tropicos, in Alia et America. In Africae continente nulla fpe-» 
cies hucufque inventa, fed in infulis adjacentibus tres. 

Species. 
I. Begonia nitiday fruticofa ere6la, foliis glaberrimis insequaliter 

cordatis obfolete dentatis, capfulae ala maxima fubrotunda. 
Begonia nitida. Hort. Kew. iii. p. 352. 
Begonia obliqua. VHerit. Stirp. Nov. i. p. 95. tab. 46. (exclufis fy- 

nonymis plurimis). 
Begonia minor. Jacqu. Collet, i. p. 128. n. 3. defer, in p. 126*. 
Begonia purpurea. Swartz Prodr. 86. 
Habitat in Jamaica. Gul. JVright. % 

This elegant fhrub, which is now a common ornament to our 
hot-houfes, was introduced here in the year I777# 

* Ic9n. vol. ii. 

Dr. 



1 



1/ 



i6o Mr. DRtanmrV Ohfervatkm 

Dr. S^wutz informed me^ by letter, that his B. purpurea is the 
common garden Begonia ; but the fynonym of Browne, which he 
quotes, cannot well belong to thefe fpecies, as Browne's plant is 
fcandent. I do not know if Begonia rofeo flore^ folio aurito, minor 
ct glabra, of Plumier (Begonia obliqua jS* Linn. Sp. PL)j which Jac- 
quin and Swartz refer to this fpecies, belongs to it; as it is impofli- 
ble from thefe few words to know what plant he meant, in a genus, 
where the fpecies are very difficult to diftinguiih from one another. 
Among a great many coUeftions of plants from different Weft In- 
dia iflands, which I have feen, I have never found B. nitida from 
any other ifland than Jamaica; and as Plumier had, as far as t 
know, not been in that ifland, I think it rather probable that he 
did not mean this fpecies: befides, the epithet of Minor is ill appli- 
cable to fo tall a fhrub, and which has as large leaves as any in the 
genus, except macrophylla and grandis. 

However unwilling to change names, I could not adopt any of 
the trivial names given to this plant : obliqua is too vague, as Lin- 
naeus under the name of Begonia obliqua includes a great number 
of fpecies, and it is even uncertain whether this be one of them ; 
minory as I have already remarked, applies ill to it; and purpurea ftill 
lefs, as no part of it is of a purple colour* 

2* Begonia ifopteraj caulefcens, foliis glabris femicordatis obfoletc 
dentatis, capfulae alls fubsequalibus parallelis ^. 

^ Habitat in Java* _ 

Of this we may foon expert a figure and defcription in Dn 
Smith's Icones Plantarum, from a fpecimen in the younger Lin- 
naeus's Herbarium. 

* Smith Ic. 43. 

3. Be- 



1 



UnruTnuu.I. tab. 14 .p.M. 




C4 



on the Genus of Begonia. 16 1 

3* Begonia reniformis^ caulefcens^ foliis reniformibus angulatis den- 
tatis, capfulae ala maxima acutangula ; reliquis parallelis mini- 
mis. Tab, 14. Fig. i, 2. 
Habitat in Brafilia, prope Rio de Janeiro, in rupium fifluris umbrofis. 

Jof. Banks. 

Defcriptio D. Do£i. Solander. 

" Caules carnofi, breves, craflitie digiti. 

^^ Fo/ia alterna, petiolata, latiora quam longiora, fubreniformia, 
crenato-dentatay angulata: angulis 8-— 12, acutisy inasqualibus; bafi 
cordata, ^tero latere minore. 

Pf/w// longitudinediametri longitudinalis foliorum. 
Pedunculus communis, fpithamaeus, terminatus Cyma bis dicho- 
toma, dein tetrachotoma. PedicelU dein umbellati. 

^^ Floris mafculi P^/tf/a quatuor> cruciata, patentia, alba: duo op- 
pofita majora, ovata, obtufa^ integerrima, in medio extus convexa ; 
reliqua dimidio minora^ oblpngo-lanceolata^ acuta, parum carinata. 

** Filamenta circiter triginta, filiformia, brevia, fubsequalia, lutea. 
Anthera lineari-oblongae, filamentis longiores, longitudine peta- 
lorum minorum, eredtse, lutese. 

** Pi/iiUum omnino nullum. 

** Floris feminei Petala quinque, oblonga, fubaequalia, patentia, 
parum concava, acutiufcula, alba. 

" Germen inferum, ovatum, triangulare: angulis membranaceis : 
membrana anguli exterioris majore. 5/)^//tres,bipartiti,villofiufculi. 
Stigmata fimplicia. 

^^Capfula ovata, trigona, angulis membranaceis duobus interioribus 
sequalibus, minoribus; membrana anguli exterioris maxima, fuperne 
in angulum acutum extenfa; trilocularis : loculis cylindricis, bafi 
dehifcentibus. 

" Semina numerofiflima, ovata, parva, receptaculo columnari craflb 
affixa/' 

Y 4. Bego- 



1^4 Mr. DryandbrV Qbfervations 

the Britilli Mufeum (Sloan. MSS. 2915, p. 202) ; and the fpeci- 
men in the Linnean Herbarium has only male flowers : fo that the 
only knowledge I have of the female flowers is from Kxmpfer's 
figure, in which the wings of the germen in feveral inflances have 
an acute angle, but in others are rounded; for which reafon I have 
avoided mentioning the fhape of the wings, in the differentia fpe- 
cifica. 

Dr. Thunberg fuppofes this plant to be dioicous, but the figtire 
of Kaempfer has male and female flowers in the fame panicle. This 
feeming contradiction may be reconciled by an obfervation I lately 
made. I wanted to examine tlie female flowers of Begonia nitids^ 
and looked for them on plants in full flower, both at Kew and in the 
Marchionefs of Rockingham's garden at Hillingdon j but could find 
nothing but male flowers, though it is very well known that the 
B. nitida is monoicous. This circumflance is not peculiar to Begonias> 
as I have feen a large cedar-tree for feveral years full of male catkins, 
without a Angle female one. Mr. L'Heritieralfo informed me that the 
female flowers are very rarely to be met with in Ailanthus glandu-r 
lofa ; and I have not yet been able to find any one in a large tree at 
Kew, which flowers very freely. 

This fpecies, and the following, macrophylla, have by far the 
largeft leaves of any in the genus ; but this has twice as large 
flowers as macrophylla# 

9* Begonia macrophylla^ caulefcens, foliis inaequalitercotxlatis cre« 
nato-dentatis : inferioribus angulatis^ capfulae alis obtufan-* 
gulis: una.maxima. 
Begonia macrophylla. Lamarck EncycL u p. 394, n. 6* defer, ex 

manufcr. Plum. 
Begonia grandifolia. Jacqu. CoIleSt. i. p. 128, n. 2 (exclufo fyno- 
nymoBrownei). 

Begonia 



en the Genus of Begmua. 165 

Begonia piiq;)urea et nivea maxima^ folio aurito. Plum. Ic. 34, talh 

4S> fig- 1- 
Habitat in infulis Indisc Occidcntalis. Car. Plumicr^ Job. Ryan^ 

Henr. de Pontbku, Alex. Anderfon. 

This fpecies is both in Sir Jofeph Banks's and the younger Lin* 
naeus*s Herbarium. A fpccimen in the former Herbarium has, in the 
axilla of the lower leaf, a panicula confiding entirely of female 
flowers; and^ from the axilla of the leaf above, a panicula of male 
flowers. 

ID* Begonia acutifoUa^ caulefcens, foliis femicordatis angulatis den- 

tatis, capfulaj ala maxima obtufangula j reliquis acutangulis. 
Begonia acutifolia* Jacqu. Collet, i p. 128, n. 4 (exclufo fyno- 

nymo Plumieri). 
Aceris fru6lu herba anomala, flore tctrapetalo albo, Sloan. Jam. 

tab. 127, fig. I, a. 
Habitat in Jamaica, Hans Sloane, Franc. Majfon. 

Sir Hans Sloane's defcription, in his Hiftory, vol. i. p. 199, agrees 
fp ill with his figure and his fpecimens in the Britifli Mufeum 
(Hortus Siccus, vol. iii. fol. 121), which I have compared with the 
fpecimens in Sir Jofeph Banks's Herbarium, that I am rather in- 
clined to believe, that he, confounding feveral fpecies, has defcribed 
one and figured anothen The leaves are longer and narrower than 
he defcribes them, and not at all rough ; having fo very few 
hairs, that they might be called fmooth. The fpecimens I have ittn 
have no appearance of being from a creeping plant ; they are all in 
fruit, and have no flowers. 

This fpecies comes very near to the following, but diflPers in the 
fmoothnefs already mentioned, and in having longer footftalks, the 
length of one third or one fourth of the leaf; which, on the con- 
trary, are fo {hort in B. acuminata, as not to equal the angle of tho 
leaf, which extends beyond the infertion of the footftalkt 

!!• Be- 



i66 Mr. Dryander*j OhftnotUiom 

11. Begonia acuminata^ caulefcens, fojiis hifpidis femicordatis acu- 

minatis inasqualiter dentatis^ capfulse ala maxima obtufangiila; 
reliquis acutangulis. Tab. ^4. Fig. 5, 6. 
Habitat ia Jamaicae montibus caeruleisi Jul. von R/)hr, GuL Wright. 
Floris tnajculi Petala quatuor, quof urn duo oppofita minora. Floris 
feminei Petala quinque, quorum duo minoroi Ad bafin germinis 
braSlea du^ argute ferratae, gerttiine dingfidio brcyipres. 
Specimens are in the Herbarium of Sir Jofeph Banks ^. 

12. Begonia humilis^ caulefcens erefta, foliis hifpidis femicordatis- 

duplicatb-ferratis, capfulae alis rotundatis parum inxqualibtiS^ 
Hprt. Kiw. iii. p. 353. Tab. 15. 
Habitat in Indiae .Occidentalia infula Trinidad, j^ex. Anderjotu 

Defcriptio. 
Tota planta carnofa, pellucida. Gaulis, petioli et pedunculi palKd^ 
rubentcs. CauUs teres, geniculis tumidis, primo anno fpithamaeus, 
altero anno bipedalis. Folia fcmicordata, acuminata, duplicator 
ferrata: fcrraturis ciliatis; fupra faturate viridia, hifpida e ftrigis 
mollibus, ereftis, bafi tuberculatis ; fubtus pallidi^ viridia, glaber- 
rima praetcr ftrigas rariores in venis, quales etiam in petiolis. 
Stipula femiovatse, concavse, ciliatae, hyalina. Pedunculi axiilares^ 
faepius dichotomi. BraBea ad bafin pedicelloruin ovata, ciliata, 
minuta. Tkris mafculi Petala alba : duo cordato-orbiculata, magna ; 
duo minima, qux in quibufdam flo/ibus omnino defunt. Fila- 
menta circiter 15, breviffima. Anther a oblong??, hiteae. Floris fe^ 
minei Petala quinque, alba, perfiftentia, obovato-oblonga : duo 
paul6 anguftiora. Germen trigonum, angulis acutis, alis rotundatis 
parum inaequalibus, pallid^ cameis. Styli tres, breviffimi. Stigmata 
bipartita : laciniae divaricatac, dcin convcrgentes, et itenim diver* 
' gentes, luteae, teftae glandulis minimis. Capfula figura germinis. 

* This fpeci€S has been introduced into the Royal Garden at Kew fince the reading of 
ihil Paper. 

When 



^ 



LinnJyoiU.I. tab. 23 .-p. 166 . 




Qj^e^a^c^n/^ A/^9mc/<^ 



fi (- 



M the Genus tf Begonia. 167 

When this plant firft flowered in Mr. Lee's garden at Hammcr- 
fmith, in Odlober laft year ( 1788), it was fuppofed to be annual, 
having produced flowers and fruits in a few months from its being 
fown. It was then very low, as appears from the annexed figure, 
reprefenting a whole plant ; and, fuppofing it to be then at its full 
height, I gave it the trivial name of humilisj in the Hortus Kew- 
enfis. But it has fmce ftood pver the winter, and grown much 

13. Begonia hirfuta^ caulefcens, foliis hifpidis femicordatis dupli- 

cato-ferratis, capfulse ala maxima obtufangula ; reliquis paral- 
lelis minimis. 
Begonia hirfuta. AubL Guiam 913, tab* 348. Lamarck EncycL \. 

P' 393> ^* 3* J^<^^* ColleSl. i» p. 129, n. 8 (exclufo fynonymo Plu- 

mieri). 
Habitat in Guianac rupibus. Fuffe Aublet. 

The fpecimeri in Sir Jofeph Banks's Herbarium from Aublet is 
without fruftification, fo that my knowledge of the fruit is only 
^ from Aublet's figure. But it muft be obferved that the figures in 
his work are made at Paris from dry fpecimens, as appears from the 
original drawings in Sir Jofeph Banks's library. In comparing them 
with the fpecimens in his own Herbarium, now in the pofleflTion of 
Sir Jofeph Banks, Ihave feveral times had occafion to obferve that 
they are not very faithful; and, in the inftance of the two fpecies of 
this genus figured there, the outline of the leaves is quite wrong: 
whence my fpecific difierences, made from the fpecimens, will not be 
found to agree with his figures. 

14. Begonia Urtic(ej caulefcens radicans, foliis utrinque hifpidis 

inacqualiter ovatis duplicato-ferratis, capfulis bafi tricor- 
nibus. 

Begonia 



i68 Mr. DRYANDER'i Obfervatiofis 

Begonia Urticae. Linn. SuppL 420. defer. Lamarck EncycL i. p. 394, 

n. 8. Jacqu. ColleSl. L p. 129, n. 7*. 
Habitat in America, Jof. Cele/l. Mutis. 

Dr. Smith will give a figure of this from a complete fpecimen in 
the Linnean Herbarium. 

15. Begonia fcandens^ fcandens radicans, foliis ovato-fubrotundis 

cbfolete dentatis, capfulag ala maxima obtufangula ; reliquis 
parallelis minimis. 
Begonia fcandens. Swartz. Pr^^/r. 86 (exclufo fynonymo Plu- 

mieri). 
Begonia glabra. Aubl. Guian. 916, tab. 349. Lamarck EncycL i. 
p. 394, n. 4. Jacqu. Collet, i. p. 129, n. 5. 

V Habitat in Guiana, Fufie Aublet: in Jamaica, GuL JVright^ Rog. 

Shake/pear J 01. Swartz. 

I have adopted Dr. Swartz's trivial name in preference to Aublet's, 
becaufe the leaves are not quite without hairs. 

In Sir Jofeph Banks's Herbarium are fpecimens both from Guiana 
and Jamaica. 

16. Begonia tuberofa^ repens, foliis; inaequaliter cordatis angulatis 

dentatis^ capfulas alis parallelis. 
Begonia tuberofa. Lamarck EncycL i. p. 393, n. 1. 
Empetrum acetofum. Rumph. Amb. v. p. 457, tab. 169, fig. 2. 

V Habitat in faxofis infularum Agiboinae, Moluccas, et Celebes. Gt. 

Ever. Rumpbius. 

I know this plant only from Rumphius's figure and defcription. 
Chevalier Lamarck has joined it with the Begonia capenfis of Lin- 
naius's Supplement; but the capfules-of that fpecies have only two 
winged corners, one wing being very large : and there is every rea- 

* Begonia urticsefolta. Smith U. 45. 

fon 



ZmnJhant,LtabJ^.jfJ60. 




I'^L 



''^^^^^t^^r i^y/i/'ra. . 



<^itcAx /' -r// /^/ 



on the Genus of B^ma. 169 

fon to fuppofc, from the figure and defcription of Rumphius, that 
B. tuberofa has all the wings of the fame fize, like the B, ifop- 
tera. 

17. Begonia rotundifoUay repent, foliis reniformi-fubrotundis cre- 

natis. 
Begonia rotundifolia. Lamarck EncycL i. p. 394, n. 7. 
Begonia obliqua cT. Sp. PL 1498. 
Begonia rofeo flore, folio orbiculari. ^ourn. Inji. p. 660. Plum. 

Cat. PL'Amer. p. ao, ic. 33, tab. 45. 
Habitat in India occidcntali. Car. Plumler. 

1 have not feen any fpecimen of this. 

i8. Begonia nana^ acanlis^ foliis lanceolatis, fcapo fubbifloro. 

Begonia nana. VHerit. Sttrp. Nov. i. p. 99, tab. 48. 

Habitat in Madagafcar : in infula Marofle intra finum Antongi!, in 

lapidibus et truncis arborum. Jo. Gul. Bruguiere. 

1 have taken up this fpecies only from Mr. L'Heritier's defcrip- 
tion and'figurfe. 

19. Begonia tenera^ acaulis^ foliis inasqualiter cordatis, Qoribus urn- 

bellatis. Tab. 16. 
Falkea tenera. Kxn. Manufcr. (in Bibl. Banks.) vol. xviL pag. 227. 
Habitat in Zeylona. Joh. GerL Koenig. 

Defcriptio D. D. Koenig. 
** Folia omnia radicalia, orbiculato-cordata, acuta, inaequaliter den- 
tata, membranacea, tenera, fupra fibrillis bafi glandulofis, albis, 
pellucidis confperfa ; fubtus fibrillis rarioribus praefertim ad venas 
adfperfa. Petioli teretes, ereftiufculi, glabri, adfperfi fibrillis rari- 
oribus, rubri, foliis longiores, faepe pedales, craffitie penna anfe- 
rina anguftiores. Scapi ere£li, teretes, Iseves, fibrillis adfperfi, car- 

Z nofi, 



lyo Mr, DeyandehV Q^Jervafms 

nofi, petiolis tenuiores et brevipres. Siipula radicales, ovatasi acu- 
minatds, concavse^ dorfo carinatas, carnofaei albicantes, marcef- 
centes, femunciales. Flores umbellati, mafculis numerofiSi fqmi- 
neis paucis. Umbella interdum compofitae. BraBea ad bafin pe- 
dicellorum lanceolate, parvae, caducae. Pedicelli tereteSy teves, 
fibrillis adfperfi, parum colorati, flore longiores. Flaris mafculi 
Petala quatpor, nivea: duo exteriora cordato-orbiculata^ extus 
fibrillis confperfa, intus glabra, nervis obfolctis notata^ ante flo- 
refcentiam invicem adpreiTa, plana^ fub anthefi patemia ; Petala 
duo interiora^ cum exterioribus alternantia, ovata, acute, ^ltrinq^e 
glabra, exterioribus duas tertias mipora. Filamenta bafi connata^ 
numerofa (50), capillacea, glabra,* albicanti-viridia. Antbera ereAa?» 
clavatae, filamcntis longiores, petalis interioribus breviores, luteas. 
Floris feminei Petala fex, quorum tria exteriora, tria interiora, a 
mafculis non nifi numero diverfa. Germen clavatum, triquetrum, 
ad angulos alatum, fibrillis adfperfum. Styli tres, ere<ftiufculi, cla- 
vati, glabri, lutefcentes, petalis minoribus parum breviores. Stig^ 
mata reniformiter curvata, apicibus craffioribus, pilis aureo-luteis 
tenuifn^is praefertim ad apices obdu6ta. Capfula turbinata, tri- 
quetra, alata, trilocularis. Receptaculum feminum membranaceo- 
trialatum. Semina utrinque ad alas adnata, numerofa, globofa^ 
minima." 
Dr. Koenig quotes as fynonym Soneri-ila Rbeed. Mai. ix. p. 117, 

tab. 65 ; but the plant there figured has tripetalons hermaphrodite 

flowers, with three ftamens and one ftyle. 

The annexed figure is from a dry fpecimen in Sir Jofeph Banks's 

Herbarium. 

20. Begonia diptcra^ acaulis, foliis inasqualiter cordatis, pedunculis 
dichotomis, capfulac ala una maxima ; altera angufta ; tertia 
obfoleta. 
6 Begonia 



M the Genus of Bigoniei. 171 

B^dnia taptenfis, Lrm. Suppl. 420. Jacqu. CoUedl. i. p. 130, n. 9. 
Begonias fpecies capenfis, Ltnn. Mant. 502. defer. Koenig. 
Habitat in inful» Joannas umbrofis, ad latera montium. Joh. Gerh. 

The account of the capfules given in the above differentia fpe- 
cifica^ is taken from the raanufcript defcription fent by Dn Koenig 
to Linnaeus, now in the poffeffion of Dn Snaith* 

21. Begonia 0^^/^/^/^, acaulis, foliis cordatis quinquelobis^ pedun^ 

culis dichotomis. 
Begonia o6topetala. L-Herit. Stirp. Nov. i. p. ibi. 
Habitat in montibus Limae. Jof. Dombey. 

Of this I have neither feen fpecimen nor figure. 

Species Obscur-*. 

ji'Stgonvdimalabarica^ caulibus herbaceis, peduncuiis axillaribus bre« 

vibus fubtrifloris, fruAibus baccatis. Lamarck EncycL i. p. 393, 

n. 2. 
-Begonia malabarica^ caule ere<9:o, foliis obfolete dentatis fubtus hir- 

futis, peduncuiis fubtrifloris. Jacqu. ColleSl. i. p. 129, n. 6. 
Tsjeria-narinampuli. Rheed. Mai. ix. p. 167, tab. 86. 

No other fpecies of Begonia being hitherto known^ whofe fe- 
male flowers have onlythrete petals,, it requires the confirmation of 
modern botanifts before one can truft to the authority of the 
Hortns Malabaricus for fo Angular a circumftancc. I have feen 
feveral male flowers of Begonia humilis with only two petals, and 
why may not a fimilar monftrofity happen in female flowers '^ 

2. Acetofa Nigritarum feu Indorum Lingat. Kamel Stirp. Luzon. 
(in Raii Hiji. vol. iii.) p. 149 n. 24. Icon in Muf. Britann. Manufc. 
Sloan. 4080, fig. 109. 

Z 2 This 



172 Ma. Dryander'j Obfervations 

This comes very near to the B. malabarica^ fo far as one can 
judge from the rude figure of Father Kamel *• 

3. In a volume of drawings in Sir Jofeph Banks's IJbrarjr, made 
at Canton by a Ghinefe, who had been inftru6ted by the late Mr. 
Blake in the art of making botanical drawings, is a figure of a Be- 
gonia, under the name of Xf^u Hey Tongj which is related to 
grandis, but differs in the leaves not being angulated, and the mar- 
gin being equally ferrated. As only male flowers are reprefented 
in the drawing, it is impoffible to determine it+. 

4. Begonia repens^ caulibus repentibus ad nodps radicofis, foliis 
uniauritis, peidunculis axillaribus longis raultifloris. Lamarck 
EncycL i. p. 394, n.. 5. ' 

Begonia obliqua" 7. Sp. PL 1498. - 

Begonia rofeo flore, folio aurito minor et hirfuta. ^oum. Inft. 660* 

Plum. Cat. PL Jtner; 20, ic. 34, tab. 45, fig. 2. 

Chevalier Lamarck defcribes this with white flowers, which, ac- 
cording to Plumier*s name, Ihould be pink. He adds as a variety 
B. rofeo flore, folio aurito minor et glabra; and adds, ic 45, f. 3: but 
that figure belongs to B. rofeo flore, foliis acutioribus, auritis et 
late crenatis. 

5. Begonia rofeo flore, folio aurito minor et glabra. Tourn. In/i. 
660. Plum. Cat. PL Amer. . 2a 

Begonia obliqua j8. Sp. PL 1498 (exdufo fynonymo iconum 

Plumieri). 

I have before fpoken of the uncertainty of this fpecies, referred to 
B. nitida by Jacquin and Swartz. 

» In this manner he figns his name to his letters to Petiver, pre(erved in the B^-itifh 
Mufeutn, Sloan. MSS. 4081* The plant named from him ought therefore to be called 
Kamelia inftead of Camellia. 

\ Tfieou-hai-tang. Mem. fur Us Chlnois par les Miffumnaires di Pi-^Kifiy iii. p. 443, 
Autumnal Hai-tang. Grojier Defer. (fChina^ i. p. 503* 

6. Be- 



M the Genus of Begoma. 173 

6r Begonia rofeo flore^ foliis acutioribus, auritis et late crenatut. 
Toum. Ifjfi. 66o^ Plum. Cat. PI Amer. 20, ic. 34^ tab. 45, fig. 3. 
Begonia obliqua t. Sp. PL 1498. 

^. Rumex fylveftris fcandfens^ foliis cordato-angulatis ab altera 
' parte majoribus» Browne Jam. 2OS0 

8- Tbtoncaxoxo coyoUin. Hem. Mexic. 195. 

9. Begonia obliqua«> Garin. Sem. p. 1569 tab* 31. 



XVII. On 



( 174 ) 



dbEB=±9iaa=sae±BB8ttte9BBH 



XVII. On the Genus af Symptbcos^ cotnprebeniSng Hopea^ MfiomOj and 
Cipomma. By M-. Charles Louis UHerttkry of the Academy of Sciences 
at Parisy Foreign Member of the Linnean Society. 

Read January ^^ i79o* 

QU ATUOR ilia genera in unum complefti fub nomine Sym- 
plocos planum mihi eft. Utinam de claffe necnon de fpeciebus 
non minus certe pronuntiare poflim ! 

Gharadteres tarn effentialem quam naturalem primum exponam. 

SYMPLOGOS. 

ChqraSler ejfentialis. 

Calyx fuperus, quinquepartitus. Petala 5 — 10, bafi coalita. 
Ordines plures filamentorum corollae adnati. Germen inferum* 
Drupa nuce tri-quinqueloculari. 

Character naturalis. 

Cal. Perianthium fuperum, campanulatum, quinquepartitum : 
laciniis fubrotundo-ovatis, concavis, villofis, perfiftentibus. 

GoR, quafi monopetala, campanulata, calyce iongior, receptaculo 
inferta: petalis f. laciniis 5 — 10, ovatis, integerrimis, re- 
flexis^ bafi in tubum longitudine calycis coalitis, fimul 
deciduis, 

Stam. 



V 



Mr. L'HehitierV AccwnU &c. 175 

Stam* filamenta numerofa^ fubmonadelpha, f. bad inaequaliter 
connexa, linearia^ plana^ erefta, tubo corollae adnexa 
vixque breviora, in plures ordines imbricata; exterioribus 
fenfim longioribus latioribufque, Anthera fubrotundae, 
biloculareS) ere£):ae. 
PisT. Gcrmen inferum, turbinatum, apice fubemerfum. Stylus fili- 
formis^ longitudine ftaminum. Stigma capitatum^ fubquin-- 
quelobum. 
Per. Drupa oblonga^ ol^aeformis^ unilocularis^ calyce coronata. 
S£M» Nux ejufdem formas^ ftriata^ tri*quinquelocularis : nucleis 
teretibus, oblongis. 
Car* Liiinasus nomine primus Hopeam et Symplocon inter Poly- 
adelphas, Aubletius Ciponimam et Linnasus fecundus Alftoniam 
in Polyandria, collocavere, E chara£keribus genuinis fupra dedu6tis 
patet has omnes ad Monadelphiam et in unum genus revocandas 
efle. Symplocos, utpote antiquius, erit nomen genericum- Locum 
ordinis vindicat Symplocos hinc inter Gordoniam et Camelliam qui- 
bus germen eft fuperum, inde inter Guftaviam et Carolineam quae 
gaudent germine infero. 

Species. 
Martinicensis, S. pedunculis fubracemofis, foliis glaberrimis ere* 

nulatis. 
S. martinicenfis. Linn.Sp.Pl.T^*j. Jacq.jim.i66y 

1. 175, £• 68. 
Habitat in Antillis. h 
CiPONiMA» S. pedunculis multifloris, foliis integris fubtus 

villofis, 
Ciponima guyanenfis. jiubl. Guy an. kJSj^ tab. 226. 
Habitat in Guiana. Aublet. Patris. h 

Turiones admodum villofi. Folia fubtws plus 
minufve villofa, faepiffime integra, rar6 laxiffime 
denticulata. Nuces quinqneloculares. 

Arechea. 



176 Mr. L'HERiTiER*i ^ccountj &c. 

Arechea. S. pedunculis fubquinquefloris, foliis ferratis nudiuf- 
culis. 
Arechea vulgo. 

Habitat in fylvis Peruae. Dombey. h 
S. Arechea intermedia eft S.martinicenfis et Ciponimae. 
Tres forte funt varietates ejufdem plants. Atten- 
dant Autoptae. 
TiNCTORiA. S. floribus confertis feflilibus, foliis glaucinis, 
Hopea tindloria. Unn. Mant. 105. 
Arbor lauri folio, floribus in foliorum alis. Catejb. 

Car. I. 54. 
Habitat in Carolin&. Frafer. h 
Alstonia. S. floribus fubdecapetalis feflfilibus fubternis. 
Alftonia theaeformis. Linn. Suppl. 264. 
Habitat in America meridionali. Mutts, h 
Dr. Olaus Swartz Symplocon o6topetalam * nupdt in Jamaica 
legebat, fed defcriptio inventori relinquenda e(L 

Calyx Alftonise imbricatus refert brafteas Symplocos, quas pro 
calyce exteriori habere licet. CoroUam monopetalam in Alftonii. 
dicebat Linnaeus fecundus, quia revera talis apparet in Symploco* 
Limbus o£lo-decem partitus in Alftonia. Symplocos Swartzii eft 
quoque o6l;opetala. Filamenta Alftonia^ tubo inferta, imbricata, ex- 
teriora longipra, graphice reprefentant ftamina Symplocos in plures 
ordines imbricatos, quorum interni breviores, difpofita. Germen fu- 
perum in Alftonia addit Linnaeus fecundus, quia fru6tu ignoto tale 
diceres germen in Symploco, et tale habuere Jacquinus et Linnaeus 
primus^ De pofitione germinis in Ciponim^ Aubletius nihil habet. 

• Nuperrime banc cvulgavit Swartz in fuo Prodromo Plantanim Indiae Occidentalis« 
Reponenda itaque inter congeneres pro fexta Symplocos fpecie : 
OcTOPETALA) S. iloribus odopetalis. Swartz* Prodr. 109. 
Habitat in Jamaica. Swartz. h 

XVIII. On 



( 177 ) 



XVIIL On the Genus of Calligonum^ comprehending Pterococcus and Pal- 
lafia. By Mr. Charles Louis VHeritier^ of the Academy of Sciences of 
Paris J Foreign Member of the Linnean Society. 

Read January 5, 1790. 

TOURNEFORTIUS peregrinator orientalis celeberrimus 
arbufculam Polygono ct Atraphaxi proximam dctexerat in 
Armenia, cujus defcriptionem et iconem in fuo Itinere Oriehtali 
evulgavit fub nomine Polygonoides Orientate Ephedra facie. Tourn. 
It. ii. 356. 

Linnaeus ex eadem Polygonoide a Gronovio accept^ genus Galli- 
goni ftabilivit. 

Hifce temporibus alteram ejufdem generis fpeciem in defertis Mari 
Cafpio vicinis legit celeb. Pallas ; fed nee Polygonoidi Tournefortii 
nee Calligono Linnsei attendens, pro novo genere novam hanc 
Calligoni fpeciem propofuit in tomo fecundo Itineris, ubi defcrip- 
tionem et iconem videre licet fub nomine Pterococci aphylli (pag. 738, 
t. v.)« Mox ipfe Pallafius huic errori alteram errorem in tomo 
tertio Itineris (pag. 536.) fubjecit, ubi afTerit fuum Pterococcum eflc 
Polygonoidem Tournefortii. 

Car. Linne nomine fecundus iterum plantam Pallafii quafi no- 
vum genus confecrare tentavit, Pallafio inventori coaetaneq praeclare 
merito de re botanic^ dicavit, nuncupavitque Pallqfiam cafpicam in 
fuo Plantarum Supplemento. Ivit itaque inter botanicos et hortu- 

A a lanos, 



178 Mr. L'HeritierV Account of 

lanos, Calligono fere ignoto, fama Pallafiae. Liceat tandem Calli- 
goniam contumeliofae oblivioni eximere. 

Calligonum in herbario Linnaeano defideratur; fed Polygonoides 
quam vidi in herbario Tournefortiano, etfi Pallafiae herb^ et flore 
fimillima, frudu admodum difcrepat. 

Tandem fatendum eft nonnuUos irrepfifTe errores in icone Tour- 
nefortiano, multa quoque defiderari in chara6lere generic© Lin- 
naeano. Exempli gratis, Tournefortius depingit ftylum unicum 
dum 3 vel 4; ftamina pauca dum circiter quindecim. Denique ex 
eadem icone crederes calycem et coroUam fimul exftare, facile de- 
ceptus difco viridi foliolorum calycinorum ita mifere exprefTo ut 
quafi perianthium exhibeatur in Tournefortio, dum corolla nulla^. 
Linnaeus ftigmata duo abfque ftylo Calligono aflignat, dum ftyli 
tres vel faepius quatuor et totidem ftigmata ; numerum ftaminum 
non prefixit ; nee frudlum graphice defcribit. 

Pauca quoque emendanda funt in optima Pallafii defcriptione. 
In Pterococco folia omnino nulla dicit Pallafius, fed revera adfunt in 
turionibus plantae nunc in meo horto floriferag et frudtiferae. Tour- 
nefortius, qui in Polygonoide depingit folia, forte tamen habuerat * 
pro nafcentibus ramulis proliferis^ articulatifque mox evafuris; dum 
ifta folia funt caduca. 

Nunc noftris et^antecefforum obfervatis fretus, Calligonum eluci- 
dare et firmare jam aggredion 



* D'ou nailTeAt au lieu de feuilles des brins cylindriqaes, epais de demie-ligne^ verd dc 
■ler, longs d'un pouce ou 15 lignes, compofes de plufieurs pieces articulees bout a bout, 
fi femblables aux feuilles de TEphedra qu'il n'eft pas poi&ble de les difiinguer fans voir les 
fleurs* Tourn. Voyag. lu 356. 



CAL- 



the Genus of Calltg^num. 179 

CALLIGONUM. 

CharaSler ejfentialis. 

Cal, quinquepartitus. Cor. nulla. Filamenta circiter 16, bafi 
fubcoalita. Germen fuperum, tctraedrum. Styli 4. Nux 
crafta polypter^ S. polychaeta,, unilocularis. 

CharaSler naiuralis. 
Cal. Perianthium monophyllum, bafi turbinatum, limbo quinque- 
partitum: laciniis fubaequalibus, fubrotundis, patentibus^ 
demum obfolete reflexis, perfiftentibus, duabus exterioribus 
paulo minoribus. 
Cor. nulla (nifi calycemdicas). 

Stam. Filamenta circiter 16, divergentia, capillaria, inferne fub- 
incraffata pubefcentia, bafique leviter coalite germen 
neftarii inftar ambientia, marcefcentia. Antherae fubro- 
tundae, biloculares, peltatae. 
PiST. Germen fuperum, ovatum, tetraedrum, acuminatum. Styli 
tres vel faepius 4, filiformes, patentes, bafi fubcoaliti feu 
definentes in acumen germinis^ filamentis vix breviores» 
Stigmata tot quot ftyli, capitata. 
Per. nullum (nifi crufta nucis). 

Sem. Nux corticata : cortice exfucco infeparabili; oblonga, tetrae- 
dra, tetraptera, unilocularis, evalvis: alis nunc membrana- 
ceis longitudinaliter bipartitis dentatis crifpis, nunc fetofis; 
fetis ramofis rigidis moUibus: nucleo ejufdem formae. 

Species. 
POLYOONOIDES. C fruiSlibus cancellatis, fetis ramofis rigidis. 
C polygonoides. Linn. Spec. 748. 
Polygonoides orientale Ephedras facie, ^oum. 

Cor. 47, //. ii. p. 356, /. 356. 
Habitat in Armenia, Tournefort. h 

A a 2 coMo- 



1 



i8o Mr. L'HeritierV Account ^ ^c. 

coMosuM. C. fruftibus cancellatis, fetis ramofis mollibus. 

Habitat in Mgypto^ Lippi : Barbaric, Louiche Desfon* 
taines. h 

Varietas forte pra*cedentis. Plantae in omnibus fimil* 
limae, fed in planti LippianSl fru6lus comofior fetis 
mollioribus, dum fetae diftin6liffimaB rigidiores in 
planti Tonrnefortian^ cujus unicnm vidi fru6tum. 
Pall ASIA. * C. fru6libus alatis, alis membranaceis crifpis dentatis. 
Ptcrococcus aphyllus. Pall. It. ii. 738, /.5. et nup. 356. 
Pallafia cafpica. Lintj. Suppl. 252. 
Habitat in Mofcovii ad Cafpium mare. Pallas. * 
Frutex femiorgyalis, ramofus, difFufus, totus floridus, fat fpeciofus. 
Rami alterni, teretes, reclinati, flexnofi, articulati, fubnodofi^ 

aphylli. 
Turiones ad fingula genicula numerofiffimi6 — 10, confertiffimi, 
fafciculati, juncei, nunc fimplices nunc ramofi, quorum pauci 
firmantur in ramos plures pereunt, fubulati, articulati, laete 
virides f. fere glauci. 
Folia alterna, feflilia, folitaria ad fingulas articulationes turionum, 

tcretia, fubulata, carnofa, turionibus conformia, femiuncialia. 
Stipula f. vagina raembranacea, obfolete trifida, marcida, articulum 

ambiens, ut in Polygonis. 
Fiores laterales axillarefve, faepius terni ad fmgulum articulum, 
pedunculati, albi difco laciniarum calycinarum virefcente, fra- 
grantes. 

De caeteris confulatur Pallafii Iter, torn. ii. p. 738. 
Herba admodum fimillima in his tribus Calligonis, flores quoque 
conformes. Differentiae fpecificae e folo frudtu hucufque eruendae 
funt. 

♦ Novum Pallafiae genus inter fyngcnefiftas vide apud VHtr. Stirp. ii. 39. t. 19. et 
Alt Kfw. 3. p. 498. 

XIX. Jn 



( i8i ) 



XIX. Obfervations on Polypodlum Oreopteris^ accompanied with a 

Specimen from Scotland. By Mr. J. Dick/on^ Fellow of the Linnean 
Society. 

Read January 5, 1790* 

THIS plant has been miftaken by all our Englifli botanifls. 
By fome it has been confounded with P. Thelypteris, by 
others with P. Filixmas; but it is very diftindl iFrom both. Doody, 
Dillenius^ Ray^ Hudfo% Lightfoot, Bolton^ &c. have all fallen 
into the fame error. For a full account of this plant I beg leave to 
refer to Vogler, who has written an entire diiTertation upon it, and 
calls it P, montanum. Wildenow gives it the fame name. Ehrhart 
in his Plant. Crypt. Decas 3, No. 22, has publiftied it by that of 
P. Oreopteris, which we prefer ; as the name of P. montanum has 
been given to another fpecies by AUioni. My opinion refpeding 
this fern is fupported by that of Sir Jofeph Banks and Mr. Dry- 
ander, as well as of Dr. Smith and Mr. Jacquin ; and, as the dif- 
fertation above alluded to may not be in every body's hands, 1 fhall 
mention fome of the moft remarkable particulars in which this plant 
differs from P. Thelypteris. 

I ft. P. Thelypt. has a fmall creeping root, of which fee a good 
figure in Schmeidel's Icones Plant, t. xi. P. Oreopteris has a large 
fcaly root, wrapped and tied together with fmall ftrong fibres which 
cannot be feparated without difficulty. 

2d. When 



i82 Mr. DicksonV Obfervaticns on Polypodium Oreoptms. 

2d, When P. Thelyp. grows old, the under fide of the leaf is 
totally covered with the confluent fru61:ifications, and the edges of 
the pinnulae are reflexed or contradcd. In P, Oreopt, the fru^ifi- 
.cations are always on the margins, both in a young and old (late, 
and never run into one another; the lobes oval and plain, 

3d. The fize of this plant is four times as large as that of ?• 
Thelypteris, and the latter always grows in boggy places ; whereas 
P. Oreopt. grows in dry woods, moors, and on hills, very rarely near 
water. 

Linnaeus, in Flo. Suec. fays of P, Thelypt punSla mlnutijjma 
difperfa. 

I know of no figure of P. Oreopteris, Mr. Bolton has given a 
fmali fig. t. 22, f. 2, which may be it ; but as he has joined it 
with P. Thelypt. it is siot worth notice*'. 

I have found it both in England atKi Scoldandj mofl pkntifoily 
in the latter. 

How Mr. Lightfoot could miftakethis fern, I cannot underiland. 



* Since the above was written^ Mr. Bolton has, in a letter to Mr. Dickfon, acknow- 
ledged his P. Thelypteris to be the P, Oreoprtfcris. His Acroftichum Tliclypteris (Fil. Brit. 
t, 43.) is Ac triic Polj^odium Thelypteris of Liamwis. 



XX. Account 



( i83 ) 



BBS 



XX. Account of a /pinning Limax^ or Slug. By Mr. ^omas Hoy^ of 
Gordon Cq/He^ jf/Jociate dfthe Unman Society.. 

Read February 2, 1790. 

IT is well known that feveral infers, fuch as Spiders and the Ca* 
terpillars of many fpecies of Moths, can convey themfelves fafely 
through the air, without wings, by means of filk lines or threads 
fpun out of their own body : but it has not been obferved (as far 
as I know) that any fpecies, arranged under Linnaeus's clafs of 
Vermes, is poffefled of a fimilar power of felf-conveyancet An in- 
ftance occurred to me, about a year ago, which leaves me no room 
to doubt but that fome of them can convey themfelves, at leaft 
downwards from a confiderable height, in that manner. In going 
through a plantation of Scotch firs, I obferved fomething hanging 
from a branch of one of them, at a little diftance. As it feemed to 
be larger than any Caterpillar of the tribes Geometra or Tortrices^ 
that I was acquainted with, it attra6ted my particular notice. When 
I approached it, I found it to be a Snai/j or rather Slug * ; and, at 
firft, fuppofed that it had been ftiaken from the tree by wind, after 
having been entangml in a Spider^s web, or among the filk linea 
of fome Caterpillar. Upon obferving it, however, more attentively, 
it was hanging by one line only, which was attached to its tail* This 

* Limax. 
e line 



184 Mr, Hov'i Account of 

line or thread, at the diftance of one inch and a half from the 
animal, appeared to be as fine as thofe fpun by the Aranea diademaj 
but nearer to its body it was thicker ; and, at its junftion to the 
tail, was broad and flat, exadlly correfponding to the tail itfelf. 
The Slug was four feet below the branch from which it was fuf- 
pended, and at the diftance of four feet and a half from the ground; 
to which it was approaching gradually at the rate of an inch in 
about three minutes, flower confiderably than its ordinary motion, 
either upon the ground, or even in afcending the trunk of a tree ; 
not fo flow, however, as one would expe6l, if it is confidered that a 
Slug is notfurniflied, like the infeds above mentioned, with a par- 
ticular refervoir of glutinous liquid, from which the filk lines are 
fpontaneoufly and almoft inftantaneoufly emitted; but that the 
line, by which it defcends, is drawn from that flimy, glutinous 
exudation gradually fecreted from its pores, and covering its whole 
body. It feemed to require a great degree of exertion in the animal 
to produce a continued fupply of this liquid, and to make it flow 
towards its tail. For this end it alternately puflied out its head, and 
drew it back again below its fliield; turned it as far as poflTible, fir ft 
to one fide and then to the other, as if thereby to prefs its fides, and 
fo to promote thefecretion. This motion of the head in a horizontal 
diredlion to one fide, made its whole body turn round ; whereby 
the line by which it hung was neceflarily twifted, and from being 
flat became round Befides, it might perhaps tend to draw off 
the glutinous matter, and thus lengthen the line; which could 
fcarcely be effe6ted merely by the weight of the Slug, although 
that was pretty confiderable, being between fixtcen and feventeen 
grains. 

This Slug feemed to be of a fpecies between the Limax agrejlis 
zxi^Jiavus. Linn. Its fpecific charadler might be, 

Limax (flans) cinereus margine favo. 

Perhaps 



; Perhaps the fliade of the fir-trees, and the wet foggy weather 
when I obfervcd it, may have rendered the Ltmax flavus of a paler 
colour; therefore I cannot pretend abfolutely to introduce thisf as a 
new fpecies, to the acquaintance of the Litinean Society. But if 
the foregoing acccrant^exhibits a new infltin6b, or fomething that 
has txoi been heretofore obfetved in the animal oeconomy^ it may 
perhaps not be below the notice of a Society inftituted for promot- 
ing the knowledge of natural hiftory. 



ADDITIONAL NOTE, 
By Dr. Shaw. 

I T is confiderably more than ten years fmce I had an opportu- 
nity of obferving the phaenomenon fo accurately defcribed by Mr* 
Hoy. Having never either before or firice obfervcd a fimilar ap- 
pearance, I was inclined to confider it as a circumftance merely ac- 
cidental ; but as it is thus confirmed by Mr. Hoy, there feems no 
reafon to doubt that the animals of the genus Limax have a power 
of occafionally managing their glutinous excretion in fuch a manner 
as to ferve the purpofe of a thread in a diredt defcent. 

The copy of my own Memorandum on this fubjed is as follows ; 

September 27, 1776. 
" Sitting in an arbour about eight feet high, I was amufed with 
a very uncommon fpeftade, which I at firft took for a Caterpillar 

B b hanging 



l86 ActoufA of a Jpimm^f Utrwt, 

baiigmg 1^ its thread, and reaching to within a foot of the ground^ 
and therefore I did not much regard it; till on a nearer view I per- 
ceived it, to my great furprife^to be a imali Slug, about three quarters 
of an inch in length. It hung by the extremity kA its tail, and gra- 
dually defcended till it almoft touched the ground, when I (hook 
it off with my finger. The thread feemed to i0ue from the body of 
the animal ; yet I never obferved a fecond or a former inftance of 
any kind of Snail having the faculty of forming a thread.*' 

February 6, lygi* GEORGE SHAW. 



XXI. Bf 



( i87 ) 



XXI. Defcriptlons of three new Animals found in the Pacific Ocean. ^ By 
Mr. ArthUfaU Mtmks^ Felbw of the Linnean Society. 

ReadA^X6i 1790. 

1. ECHENEIS lineat^ Tab. 17, ¥tg.x^ 

E CAUDA cuneata^ ftriis capitis decern^ lineis albis utridqut 
• duobus longitudinalibus. 
Habitat in Oceano Pacifco^ inter T^ropicoSytefiudim adhcerens. 

O • 

The body of this fifh is about five inches long; fubulate, fmoothf 

and of a dark brown colour ; dotted all over with minute darker 

fpots, and ornamented with two whitifh longitudinal lines on each 

fide, which begin at the eyes and end in the tail. 

The under mandible is a little longer than the upper, and both 
ire furniftied with minute teeth. The clypeus on the top of the 
head has but ten tranfverfe ftreaks^ which is the chief diftindfcion 
of this fpecies. 

B 10, P 18, D 33, V 5, A 33, C 14, 

a. FASGIOLA clavata. Tab 17, Fig. a. 

F. corpore tcretiufculo annulato rugofo albido pofticc 

gibbofo. 
Habitat in Oceano PacifcOyfapitis in ventrtculo Scombri Pelamidis. 

B b a This 



l88 . Mr. MeniJies'x Defirtptions^ &c. 

This. little animal is about two inches long, having a foft cylin^ 
drical body annulated with fine wrinkles; and towards the extremity 
it becomes fjgihetically gibbofe, ending in the anal aperture, and 
ftrongly marked with tranfverfe rug^. About two thirds of its 
length from this extremity, the ventral aperture protrudes ; from 
which to the mouth it becomes very flender, and on the under fide 
fdmewhat depreffed. 

In moving, it faftens itfelf alternately by the ventral aperture and 
its mouth, raifing its flender neck between them into an arched form 
like a leech, and in this plainer dr?igs its body along with a flow 
motion. 

It is of a whitifli colour, fomewhat pellucid, difcharging at its- 
mouth a black-coloured fluid, which can eafily be perceived through 
its body. I have often found it in the maws of the boneto, betweea 
the Tropics, in the Pacific Ocean- 



I 



3* HIRUDO branchiata. \ 

H. deprefla attenuata albida, fetis lateralibus ramofis utrin-* 
que 7, interaneis fufcis bifidis perlucentibus* 

Habiiatin Qceano Pacijica^ te/ludim adhcerens^ 

I 

The body, when moving, is about an inch long, of a whitifli pel* 
lucid colour, foft, deprefled, annulated with fine rugse, and towards j 

the head attenuated, having a row of foft pellucid branchy briflles ! 

on each fide, oppofite to one another, making in all feven pair. The . ] 

head is fmall and truncated; but the other extremity is larger, round,- * ' 

and dilated* The entrails appear through the body, bifid, and of a ! 

dark brown colour. ; 

• This fpecies was found in great abundance adhering to a turtle, 
in the Pacific Ocean, between the Tropics. 

XXII. ^^ - 



C 189 ) 



BBS 



XXIL Remarks on the Gems Veronica. By James Edward Smithy M^ D. 
F. R. S. PrefidefU of the Linnean Society. 

Read May j^^ 1790J1 ^ 

THE genus of Veronica is one of the moft familiar to Euro* 
pearr botanifts. Its generic chara6ler is among the cleareft 
and moft decifive, and its fpecies m general as well afcertained as- 
thofe of moft large genera. Neverthelefs fome of thenv are ftill ob- 
fcure ; and as this obfcurity has in many inftances originated with 
the great Linnaeus himfdf, the removal of it is only to be expected 
from the inveftigation of his Herbarium and original manufcripts. 

The various remarks which I have made on this genus fhall be- 
the fubjedt of the following Papen Not that they are all that re- 
main to be made> but they are all about which I am certain. As- 
far as they go they will ferve to corre6l long-eftablilhed errors, and 
will therefore be not quite unworthy notice; though they may 
hereafter be much increafed, and perhaps c6rre£led, by the ea- 
quiries of myfelf or others. 

Dies diem docet. 

I take the fpecies on which I have any thing to remark in the 
order in which they ftand in the fourteenth edition of Syfteoia 
Vegetabiliura* 



1^0 Dk. SmithV Remarks on 

2* V.^/i^r/-^ is Veronica fpicata anguflifolia. C. B. Pin. 246, as ap* 
pears from the Sherardian Herbarium at Oxford. 

10. V. of^lnaTts /3 is moft certainly a diftinft fpecies from the com« 
mon a. It is plentiful on the Alps of Switzerland and France; 
and I have frequently compared it, in its native foil, with the 
common V. offic. growing in the fame place. 

I prefer the name of V. Allionii, which has been given it 
by Villars, to that of V* pyrenaica, fay which AUioni has 
diftinguifhed it, as it is by no means peculiar to the Pyreneaa 
Mountains. Its fpec;fic character is as follows : 

V. Allionii^ fpicis lateralibus pedunculatis, fbliis oppofids 
fubrotundis nitidis rigidis, caule glabro reptante. 

Synonyms. 
V. Allionii. Vtllars^ Plantes de Dauphit^^ v. ii. p. 8. 
V. pyrenaica. All. Flo. Fed. 165, t. 46, f. 3. 
V. No. 2. Gerard. Flo. Gall. Prov.^22. 

Defcripthn. 
Root perennial, creeping. 

Stem round, fmooth, procumbent, creeping verjr far. 
Leaves roundifh, or obovate, firm, rigid, totally different in 

fubftance from thofe'of V. officinalis, fmooth, fhinin^ 

crenate, paler on the under fide. 
Spikes oval, denfe, on long footftalks. 
Flowers very numerous, violet-coloured, of a different figure 

from thofe of V. officinalis. 

Villars mentions a variety with hairy leaves and ftem, 
which I have never feen. 

12. V. lamtfchatka^ Linn. Supp. 83, appears to me a variety of V. 
aphylla, only differing in the greater fize of all its parts. The 

circumftance 




the Genus Fertmica. 191 

drcumftance of the hairs being articulated like a conferva, is 
common to both plants, as well as the ferrated leaves. We 
may rejoice to get rid of fo uncouth a trivial name as kamt'* 
JchaUca\ and indeed all trivial names taken from the countries 
of plants, are now generally laid afide by the more accurate 
and fcientific botanifts. 

15. V* alphm is now certainly known to grow in Britain, having 
been foimd in the Highlands of Scotland by Mr; Dickfon in 
1786, and not before in this ifland; what has been taken for 
it being either a large variety pf V. ferpyllifolia, or V. fruti- 
culofa* 

l8, V» multifida. The fynonym of Buxbaum applied by Linnasus 
to this plant, belongs in fafl: toV.orientalis, Hort, Kew.* The 
. real V. multifida is only known by an original fpecimen in 
the Unnean Herbarium from Siberia, by which it appears to 
be totally diftin6t from V. auftriaca (with which moft people 
confound it) and ^1 the varieties of that plant* Its leaves are 
multipartite, their lacinias pinnatifid, with the lobes decur^ 
rent. 

Calyx quinquefid, perfe^ly fmooth. 

It appears not to turn black or brown in drying, as V. 
auftriaca does. 

The fynonyms of Jacq. Fla Atrftr* t. 329^ quoted by 
Murray, ought of courfe to be excldded. 

30. V. tatifoRa. To this fpecies is now by common confent referred 
the V. pfeudo-charaaBdrys of Jacquin^ which indeed fcarcely 
can be deemed even a variety. V. Teucrium and V. piiofa of 
Linnaeus feem alfo to belong to. the iame fpecies} but, as I 

• V, hctcrophylla. Sallfi. U. tab. 4. 

2 have 



19* T>vi. Smith^j Remarks on 

have no original fpecimens of thefe two plants, I cannot de- 
termine the matter with abfolute certainty. The ^long de- 
fcription of V. pilofa, Sp. PL 1664, is by Linnaeus erafed from 
his own copy, which looks as if he had not been quite clear 
in his ideas on the fubje6t% 

32. V. agreftisj and ... 

33. V. arvenjis^ are both always found with white flowers in th« 

environs of Rome* 

37. V. romana ought certainly to be excluded. All its fynonyms, in 

the firft edition of Species Plantarum, belong to V. acinifolia; 
and the fpecimen in the Linnean Herbarium, from which the 
fpecific difference (as well as the defcription, Manu 317) wa« 
made, is moft certainly nothing elfe than V. peregrina* 
V. romana, AHion. Flo. Ped. No. 289, t. 85, f..2, t^tllars Daupb. 
V. ii. p. 19, feems alfo to me to be a variety of V. acinifolia* 

38. V* acinifolia. The figure of Vaillant is excellent. 

39. V. peregrina. Itsfgecific character ought to be thus amended : 

V. floribus folit^riis feffilibus, foliis oblongis obtufiufculis den- 

tatis integrifque, cauleeredio. 

Fig. 407 of Flo. Dan. feems to be intended for this plant, 
but it is one of the moft wretched that can be conceived; the 
leaves are there reprefented as ovate and acute. Morifon's 
figure, § iii. t. 24, f. 19, expreflfes tolerably well the upper 
part of the plant with entire leaves. 

This fpecies is a native of Sweden and Denmark. I have alfo 
a wild fpecimen gathered by Commerfon at Buenos Ayres. 

The 



the Genus Vermca. 193 

The lower leaves are almoft always obtufely dentated; the 
upper ones among the flowers as conftantly entire. 

V. hllobay Mant 2. 172, is accidentally Omitted by Murray. It is the 
V. orientalis, Ocymi folio, flore minimo, of Toumefoit's Corolla 
' and Herbarium. 

The fpecific charafter and^defcription in Linnaeus^s Mantiffa 
are very faulty; and the fynonyms of Columna {Ecphr. t. 290) 
and C. Bauhin (JPiru 249) have no kind of affinity to the Lin- 
nean^ plant. 

The following defcription was made from the Toumefortiaii 
Herbarium, when I named the plant V. rubiaeea ; but as V. bi- 
loba is a good name already printed, it ought not to be changed* 
Y. floribus folitariis, foliis cordato-lanceolatis dentatis, calycinis 

asqualibus ovatis acuminatis trinerviis. 
V. biloba Linn, exclufis fyn. Bauh. & Columnas. 
V. arvenfis annua, Chamasdryos folio. Buxb. C. i, p. 24, t. 36. 
Root fibrous, annual. 

Stem three or four inches high, ereft, branched, downy. 
Leaves on fhort footftalks, cordato-lanceolate, acute^ ferrated, 

fcarcely hairy. 
Flowers folitary, on footftalks, about the top of the flem and 

branches, alternate. 
BraSea lanceolate, acute, entire, flightly ciliated, a little longer 

than the footftalks of the-flowers. 
Cafyx of the fruit much enlarged, of four leaves, ciliated, equals 

ovate, acute, each marked with three nerves, and not unlike 

the leaves of fome fpecies of Rubia or Galium ; they much 

exceed the corolla and capfule in length. 
Corolla fmall, white. 

C c Cap/ule 



194 I5** SMiTH*i Remarks on 

Capfuk obcordate, downy; 

Tourncfort gathered this plant in the corn-fields of Cappa* 
docia* It may be inferted into the Syftema Veg* next to V. aci- 
nifolia. 

I fhall conclude this paper with the two following fpecies oF 
Veronica, defcribed at the fame time from TournefortV Herbariunu 

V- gentianoides ^^ corymbo terminal! hirfuto, foliis radicalibas lance«» 
olatis acutis fubcrenatis nudis* 

V. orientalis ere6la Gentianellae foliis, ^ ^oum. CoroL et Herb. 
V. erefta Blattariae facie. BuxL C. i, p. 23, t. 35* 

Gathered by Tournefort in Cappadocia, by Buxbaum in Arme- 
nia-: Dr. J. Sibthorp alfb found it in his tour to the eaft. 

This fpecies ought to ftand next V. bcUidioideSj to which it is 
next akin, though perfoftly diftinft; 

Root perennial. 

The radical leaves are oppofite, lanceolate, acute, irregularly 
crenate, marked with three nerves, perfeftly fmooth, pale and 
fomewhat cartilaginous in the margin, and very much referable 
thofe of Gentiana acaulis. Thofe on the ftem are ftrikingly dif* 
ferent, obtufe and hairy. 

Stefn afcending, fmooth below, hairy in the upper part» 
Corymbus fomewhat fpiked, confifting of maHy flowers*. 
Footftalks hairy. 
Calyx hairy, quadrifid, equal. 
Corolla large, beautiful, of a deep blue,. 
Antbera heart-fliaped> large.. 



* V. gentianoides. Vabl Symb^ Bot:p. r» 



The 



the Oenus Veronica. 195 

The figure of Buxbaum erroneoufly reprefents the plant alto- 
gether fmooth, and the floral leaves acute. 

yinJUiformis^ floribus folitariis, foliis cordatis crenatis pedunculo brc- 
vioribus, calycinis lanceolatis. 
V. orientalis, foliis hederae terrpftris, magno flore, Tourn. Cor. et 

Herb. Buxb. C i, p. 25, t, 40, f. !• 

Gathered by Tournefort in the eaft, Buxbaum fays it grows 
about hedges in Bithynia* It fhould be placed next to V. hede- 
rifolia. 

Root appears to be annual. 
Stems filiform, procumbent. 
Leaves alternate, on fhort footftalks, fubrotundo-cordatei crenate^ 

(not lobed or cut) notches about three on each fide, clothed 

with a few fcattered articulated hairs, as in V. hederifolia. 
Flowers folitary, axillary, large. 

Fbotjlaiks filiform, downy, three times longer than the leaves# 
Leaves of the Calyx equal, lanceolate, (lightly downy. 
CeroHa tmct 2l^ long as the calyx^ fpreading, blue. 
Capfuk obcordate, reticulatftd; 

This plant is very like V. hederifolia in many refpefts, but ir 
fufficicntly diftinguiflied firomi that fpeciesby its leaves being ere- 
liate and not fivc*^lbBed/ the fcgments of ib calyx lanceolate, 
not ovate, and by the very long^ filiform footftalks of its flowers. 



C c a XXIII. Dt^ 



( 196 ) 



XXIII. Defcriptions of two new Species of Pbalena. By Mr. Louk 
Bofcy ofParis^ Foreign Member of the JJmean Society. 

Read O^ober 5, iypo* 

I. PYRALIS tubcrculana. 

PALIS anticis girifeis fufco pundatis margine craffiori andce 
• trituberculato. 
H. Parifiis. Larva in Hedyfaro Onobrichidc ct Coroailia. coro* 
natSl* 

Larva fufco viridis* FoIUcukm fportasforme, e parench;m& plan* 
tarum fabricatum et cauli affixum. Pif^^ Junio occurrit, et Imago 
Aprili fequentis anni. 

Caput ex aibo argenteum ; Palpi comprefli, fufci^ albo pun Aati ; 
j^ntenn^e fufcse bail fubtus argentex et auriculatse; Oculi nigp. 
Thorax argenteogrifeoque varius^ antice criftatus ; Cri^a argentea, 
f ufco*bifafciata ; fafcia anteriori minorL ylLe deflexa^r; Suptriores 
fupra albse, fufco grifeoque pun(^ata& et maculatse ; Tubereula tria 
feriem formantia margine antice craffiori^ omnia asqualia non fcabra^ 
din^idio alba et fufca. Al^ inferiores pallide fufcas^ pundfco centrali 
nigro. Pedes fufci^ albo annulatL 

Tab. it. Fig. 4. Pyralis tuberculana. 

5« Folliculus pupam continens; 

«• TI- 



Zinn,7yYUif. I.tabjl. p. 2^6 . 




/. WeA^/te^^ f€yn^zi/^z. 






S. fLj^a^c>coui c/fn/a/oL, ^i. ^yuyrf/zi/lo ^^rtrrfrA/zi/a . 



^ 



S\\\ 



<=r-^^ir^a^/f^^ ttyy^ti/M ^.S^/^^Aeyr^cii/oy 



6^' 




K^^/ui//rn^:r Ciy^m^. Q^Aa9^r7rf/t97y?^e//a 



Mr. Bosc'i Defcriplons of two new Phaken^^ 197 

a. TINEA Sparrmannella. 

T. Alls violaceo-nitentibus maculis numerofis aureis^ major! ad 

marginem tenuiorem. 

H. Parifiis. Capitur aeftate in paludibus. 

Caput nigrum, hiifutiffimum; Antentue fufcse, filiformes. Ale 
gntica violaceo-nitentes aureo-maculatae* Maculae numerofas, an* 
gulatae vel irrcgulares, fupra difcum adfperfae, tamen ad fafcias 
formandas tendentes; duodecim circiter ad marginem crafliorem, et 
una major iii medio ad tenuiorenu Subtus, (icut ahe po/lka^ aurato 
violaceae* Pedes fiifco argentei. 

Locus in Syftemate poft Tineam Mouffetellam. 
In memoriam peregrinatoris celeberrimi Andreas Sparrmann^ Sue^ 
cki, in botanicis et zoologicis verfatiflimL 

Infe£i:um pro mole inter fplendidiilima* 
^Tab. vj. Fig. 6. Inf. magnit. nat* 
7. Id»au£fcum* 



ysuvt.rbt 



1 



( 198 ) 



MUiIMM I" IU^a.r,fc MiaJtMM Bf!,','UIP'l ! ii agttggg»gggg 



XXIV. Hhe Botankat Mj/hry of the- Genus Dillemih w//i& an Addition 
► tffeveral mndefcript Species^ By Charles Peter ^bunbergj Knight of 
the Order ofWafa^ Profejfor of Botary and Medicine in the Univerfty 
' '^f^pf^h F.Q^^*^^ Member of the Linnean Society. 

INTER arbores illas Indicas^ quaram. figuf as et defcripliones^ 
nobifcum communicapunt iUuftriff. Rhecde in' Htorto Maliba- 
rico €t Rumphius in Herbario Amboinehfi, biLtENiiE^GentJs^certe 
adeo fpeciofum fefe ofFert, ut ulteHus et acetiratius noftrum examen 
merito mereri videatun Hujus fpeciem non nifi unicam, a Rheede 
ab Ouds Hoom commemoratam, illuftris a Linn6 in Syftemate fuo 
fexuali collocavit, ac minus jufte hue retulit Songium Rumphii, qui 
quidem, uti etiam ejus Sangius valde diflimiles et diftinftae funt, atque 
fic etiam tres diverfas conftituunt fpecies. Poftea, fub meis in infula 
Ceilona excurfionibus botanicis, tres alias et quidem valde ab in- 
vicem diftin6tas fpecies indagare mihi contigit, fic ut fex fint, quas 
fub Dillenia! pulcherrimo genere, jam militent fpecies. Has omnes, 
breyiter dcfcriptas, novafque depi6bas, non indignas fore credidi, quaa 
inferantur A6tis Societatis, quae non modo pro incremento Hiftoriae 
Naturalis, et imprimis Botanices, fed etianvpro ulteriori ejus refor- 
matione fedul(^ vigilare fibi propofuit. 

CharaSier generisy r Generibus Plantarum Linnaei allatus, vitu- 

perandus omnino non eft, licet ilL botanicus ipfe ipfam non vidiffet 

. . ' '.5 plantam 



n 



Iimi.iymu.I.tKA.i0.pJ»^ 




Frofejfor ThunbergV Bifiory oft^ Genus DiUenia. 19^ 

plantam vivam vel ficcatam, fed ex defcriptione ct figura Rhcediana 
illam defcripfiffet, et licet, quoad reliquas fpecies, pariim emendan- 
tfus erit. 
Cal* Perhnthium y^tnt^Y!)Ay\[\imi foUola obovata, obtufa, concava^ 

• coriacea, intus glabra, extus villafa, perfiftentia* 
Corolla pentapetala, decidua. Petala obovata, inferne atterfuato* 

anguftata,.obtufiffima, temiiffime fubcrenata, concaviufctila, 

calyce longiora. 
Stam. Ft/amenta fubnulla, fed ' 

uinthera numerofiffimae, germinis bdii infertas, lineares, au- 

rantiacaei linea nigra exdratse, calyce breviores, 
Pollen flavum. 
PisT. G^r/w;^ fuperum, ovatom. 

Styli plures, ere6ti, fimplices, antheris longiorcs* 

Stigmata fimpli'cia. 

PruSlum maturum videre non licuit. 

Species. 

J. D. Integra : (Ta%. 18.) foliis obovatis obtufis fublntegriJ, 
pedunculis unifloris. 

Crefdt in ihfula Ceilona^ Indise Orientalise 

Cellonenjibus: Gudapara et Runumidale. 

Jjrbor ramis alteniis, rugo(is,-fufcis, glabris* 

Folia alterna, petioiata, obovata, obtufa, a medio ad api- 
cem ferrulata ferraturis obfoletis vixque manifeftis. 
trtrinque glabra, coriacea, fupra viridia, fubtus palli- 
diora, nervofa nervis alternis parallels furfum curvis,, 
utrinque intet nery.os tenuiflime reticulata, patentia^ 
fubfpithatoaea, palmam lata. 

Petioli femiteretes, canaliculati, villofi, poUicares* 

Flores 



200 Pr^^r ThonbergV Hi/lcty 

Flares in ultimK ramulis terminales, fubfolitarii, peduti- 

culati. 
Ufus : Deco6to foliorum utuntur Ceilonenfes ad ulcera 

depuranda. 

2. T^.fpedofa : foliis oblongis, rotundato-acutis denticulatis, pedun- 

culis unifloris. 
^ Crefcitj ut affeverat Rheede, in Malabaria ; in' Java ipfe inveni 

crefcentem. 
Dillenia Indlca^ Linn. Syft.Vegct. xiv. p. 507, Spec. Plant, p. 7541 

excluf^ fynonymo Rumphii. 
Syallta Malabaris, Rheede Hort. Malabar, torn. iii. p. 39. 

tab. 38, 39. 
Arbor excclfa ramis cralfis, rugofis, cinereis, glabris. 
Tolla alterna^ petiolata^ oblongo-rotundata, obtufa cum a^rumine^ 

undato-denticulata,parallclo-nervofa nervis fuboppofitis, fupra 

glabra^ fubtus obfcura^ fufcefcentia^ fubpedalia^ palmam lata« 
Petiolus craffus, brevis, vix pollicaris. 
Flores terminales in ramulis, folitarii, pedunculati. 

3. D. elliptica: foliis clUptico-ovatis acutis fcrratis, pedunculis 

unifloris. 
l^ ' Crefciiy ex audoritate Rumphii, in Ambolna^ Celebe^ Macajfaria. 
Songium Rumph. Herbar. Amboin. tom. ii. p. 140, tab* 45. 
Folia altema, petiolata, elliptica, acuminata, argute ferrata, ner* 

vofa : nervis bppofitis, parallelis. 
Flores terminales, folitarii, pedunculati. 

4. D. refufa: (Tab. 19*) foliis obovatis truncatis ferratis, pedunculis 

unifloris. 
Crefctt in Ceilonae fylvis. 
Arbor ramis alternis, rugofis, fufcis, glabris^ 
Folia alterna, approximata, petiolata, obovata ; infeme attenuata, 

Integra; 



^ 



^ Itfm Ti-im^,LttA m.p.z^^a 




L I 



f df the Gems Dillenia. 201 

Integra; fupcrne remote ferrata ferraturis obfoletis; apicetrun- 
cata, fubretufa; coriacea^ utrinque glabra^ neryofa: nervis 
parallelis, alternis, furfum curvatis ; inter nervos tenuiflimo 
reticulata, patent! a, palmam hxh lata, et duplo longiora. 

PetioU femiteretes, canaliculati, bafi hirfuti, vix pollicares* 

Flos terminalis, folitarius, pedunculatus. 
^ 5. D. /errata : foliis cllipticoovatis acutis ferratis, pedunculis tri- 

floris. 
^^ Cre/city fecundum Rumphium, in Cekbe^ Macajfaria^ Java. V 

SangiuSy Rumph. Herban Amboin. torn. ii. p. 142, tab, 46. 

Folia altema, petiolata, elliptica, acuta, argute ferrata, nervofa : 
nervis fuboppofitis et alternis, parallelism 

Flores in pedunculis lateralibus terni, pedicellati. 
6. D. dentata (Tab. 20) : foliis ovatis retufis dentatis, pedunculi* 
trifloris. 

Crefcit in Ceilona. 

Ceilonetifibus : Diapanu 

Arbor ramis alternis, rugofis, cinereis, glabris. 

Folia altema, petiolata, ovata, obtufiffima feu emarginato-retufa, 
inferne integra, fupemS et apice dentata, coriacea, nervofa : 
nervis fuboppofitis, parallelis, furfum dire6iis, utrinque glabra, 
fupra viridia, fubtus obfcuriora, palmaria. 

PetioU angulati, glabri, folio paulo breviores. 

Flores in ramis terminales, racemofi, fubtemL 

Pedicelli altemi, glabri, femipoUicares. 



D d XXV. Ttc 



! 
i 



( 20» ) 



XXV. J^e Botanical Hi/iory of Trjfolium dpefire^ medium^ andpratenfe. 
By Adam Afxelius^ M. A. Demon/irator of Botany in the Univerjity of 
Upfaly Foreign Member of the Linnean Society. 

Read November 2, 1790; 

WITH a view of publilhing a new edition o£ the Flora Skteciea 
of the late illuftrious Linnaeus, I have long been occupied 
in' procuring information concerning the Swedifh Plants, Having 
fpent ten years in this purfuit> I flattered myfelf with the idea of 
knowing all thofe defcribed by him, a few only excepted, which I 
could not perfeftly make out. But on my arrival in this country 
I found myfelf in mi error; having met with many of the moft 
common plants in Sweden, which in England bear quite different 
names. This difcovery opened to me a new field of ftudy and la- 
bour. It was neceflary to examine whether the Englifh or Swe- 
difh botanifls underflood by the true names the plants defcribed by- 
Linnaeus. It would, indeed be an inexcufable fault in the Swedifh 
ones, if they, who had corjflant accefs to, and were tutored by^ 
/ their mafter himfelf, fhould neverthelefs be always in the wrong 
in fuch cafes ; accordingly v^e find the foreign natural hiftoriana 
now and then likewife miflaken. 

This is the lefs furprifing, as, in the firft place, Linnaeus has 
often mifquoted fynonymous names from the ancient authors ; and,, 
in the fecond place, when he has not given the defcription of the 

plants, 



Mr. ApzELius'i Hjfiory of three Species offrifoUum. 203 

* 
plants, his chara6teriftics alone, being fhort and concife, will not 

always fuffice to diftinguifli his plant from all others. This diffi- 
culty is great where there is no recourfe to the fpecimen itfelf 
which he defigned by fuch a name. A plant might be found in this 
country, for inftance, which Linnseus never knew; which never- 
thelefs might agree perfeflly with the chara6leriftics of one in his 
fyftem, though it differed very efTentially from it in many other 
refpe£fcs : this might give rife to miftakcs ; as has frequently 
been the cafe. 

If Linnaeus has been theinvoluntarycaufe of fuchconfu(ion,he has, 
however, a claim to our indulgence ; for, independent ofhis want of 
leifure for minutely inveftigating every appellation given each plant 
,by various botanifts, he could not, in claffifying nature, derive any 
afliftance from preceding authors, as thefe in general furnifhed him 
Ijut with a vague and confufed found of terms, owing to their own 
ignorance and careleffnefs, whereby they have ftrangely miflaken 
and confounded many very different plants. This has particularly 
been the misfortune of that inaccurate compiler Cafpar Bauhin, 
and in a great meafure alfo of Haller; fo that, in confulting the 
former efpecially, one is always uncertain what he means. Another 
confideration is, that Linnasus at that time had no figures to refer 
to, except thofeof old authors, which at times are only cuts in wood, 
and for the mofl part fo badly executed, that it is a hard matter, 
and fometimes even impofTible, to pronounce which plant they 
are precifely meant to reprefent ; efpecially when the queflion is of 
two fpecies nearly related. 

But, be this as it may, I find that the wrong quotations of Lin- 
nseus have often led other authors into error; owing ap]>arently to 
their having paid more ^tention to his citations than to his very 
chara^eriflic dcfcriptions.of plants, which however are the^chief 
things to be. confidered ; and, if maturely weighed, fufficient to pre- 

D d .2 vent 



ao4 Mr, AfzeliusV Hlftory of 

vent many miftakes. I Ihall do myfelf the pleafure of communi- 
cating fucceffively my obfervations relative to cafes of tiiis nature; 
but at prefent fhall confine myfelf to three fpecies of Trefoil, 
which, common as they are, particularly two of them, ftiU 
want a good deal of iiluftration. Thefe plants have, even till this 
very time, not only been confounded among themfelves, but 
alfo with many others. And though we are now furnifhed with 
good figures of each, ftill the true limits between them are not yet 
drawn ; nor have thefe fpecies as yet been fo minutdy and accu- 
rately examined, as for the always invariable and diftinguiftiing 
charafteriftics of each to have been pointed out. 

In order to form an adequate idea of thefe Trefoils, and to know 
their hiftory from the beginning to the prefent time, I have exa- 
mined all authors quoted by Linnseus, Reichard, Murray, and the 
Englifti botanifts, with many others that I have been favoured 
with an opportunity of feeing in the large and choice library of Sir 
Jofeph Banks ; without which affiftance, and the examination of 
the Linnean Herbarium, my enquiries would have been confined 
and imperfe6t. In the courfe of my inveftigations I have difco- 
vered, that many of the authors cited treat of plants quite different 
from thofe for which they have been quoted; and that others fpeak 
in fuch a manner, that it is impoffible to judge to what particular fpe* 
cies their inaccurate figures, confufed defcriptions, and vague cha^ 
Fafteriftics, if at times evMi all three are to be found together, are 
the moft applicable. With regard to thofe authors who have either 
been miftaken themfelves in their quotations, or been mifquoted 
by others, I have,, to the beft of my judgment, endeavoured to put 
them id their proper places ; and, as to the others, I could do no 
more than make my obfervations, and give my opinion, where parti- 
cular hint& or circumstances have not enabled me to difcover what 

they 



three Species of TrifoUim. 205 

they meant. Upon the whole, indeed, thefe authors are of a local 
ufe only, in pointing out to their own countrymen the places 
where their native plants are to be found. 

In the firft place, therefore, I beg leave to give a brief hiftory of 
each of thefe three Trefoils, and fhew with which each of them 
has been, and ftill is, confounded, together with my reafons for 
what alterations I may have made. In the fecond place, I (hall 
quote the genuine fynonyms of authors, whom I am by fufficient 
reafons convinced to have treated of thefe plants. And, thirdly, I 
fhall add an adequate defcription of each, with particular charac- 
teriftics fufficient at all times to diftinguifti them from each other, 
and from the fpecies neareft related to them. To begin then with 

TRIFOLIUM ALPESTRE^ 

Clufius is, to my knowledge, the firft who mentions this Trifo- 
lium, in his Hiftory of the Hungarian and Auftrian Plants. He 
has left us no figure ; but his defcription, brief and imperfe6l as 
it is, ftill fuffices to convince us that he meant the real one. He 
fays that, both in ftiape and fize, it much reiembles the preceding, 
which is either Tr. pamonicum or Tr. montanum ; but that its 
kaves are fcwnewhat more narrow; its flowers red, and without 
fmell; its fpikes in general two in number, one of which is fmaller 
than the other, and both of them clofe together at the top of the 
ftalk, without peduncles, and as it were concealed within the upper- 
moft leaves. This defcription he has afterwards introduced unal- 
tered into his larger Hiftory of Rare Plants. 

Cafpar Bauhin has quoted both thefe paflages of Clufius under 
his TrifoUum montanum purpureum majusj in his Pinax ; from whicb 
k indeed appear? probable that he meant the fame plant, but it ]s 
not quite certain; as he adds, TrifoUi altera fpecies major p Gefn. and 

^rifoliunk 



ao6 Mr. AfzeliusV Hlfiory of 

TrifoUum aliud montamm majus^ Thai, who appear to treat of fpecies 
different from thofe of Clufius. Gefner fays only that his Trifo- 
lium is larger and more common than pratenfe: but thefe remarksj^ 
though brief, give more reafon to fuppofe he meant Trifol. me^ 
Jium, than aJpe/ire; which latter is rather a fcarce plant, and 
but little refembling our common clover. On the other hand^ 
Thalius defcribes his Trifolium as having oblongum quqfique fpicatum 
capituium; adding that the Trifol. fpicatum, which Tragus calls 
Cyti/us^ only differs from it by having longer leaves as well as fpikes* 
Now the Cytifus of Tragus being Trifol. ruiens a, it is alfo pro- 
bable that the plant of Thalius is its variety ; and if this be the 
cal^ C. Bauhin would have done better had he placed this quota* 
tion under his Trifolium fpica oblonga rubra. Perhaps this author, 
never fcrupulous in his quotations, meant, however, by his firfl- 
mentioned Trifolium, the real alpefire. 

But, at all events, Bauhin has been indifcriminately quoted by 
every fucceeding writer that had occafion to treat of either 7r//^ 
Hum ajpejire or medium. Among the authors more immediately fuc* 
ceeding him, 1 have had an opportunity of confulting John 
Bauhin, Ray, Ruppius, Tournefort, and Boerhaave. Both the 
firfl-mentioned, in their Hiftorise Plantarum, have copied the 
defcription of Clufius ; and thus there is no doubt but their Tri- 
folium was the true alptftre. But Ray has made a miflakc in add- 
ing Ger. Em. 1 1 86. 4, and Park. 1103. i ; for both thefe treat of 
Trifolium fpica oblonga rubra^ C. B. under which name he has like- 
wife quoted them, and confequently twice on the fame page, and 
under two different fpecies. Here I mufl: alfo notice another mif- 
take committed by Ray^ or rather, perhaps, by his editor Dillenius. 
In his Hiflory, as well as both the firfl editions of his Synopfis, he has 
defcribed a Trifolium which is the real medium^ without referring to 
2 any 



three Species of Trifolkm. 207 

any preceding author. But in the third edition we find quoted fuch as 
have intended the Trifol. alpejlre. Ruppius has done the fame, re- 
marking at the fame time that his ^rifoUumferiJinnk eft illi quodferU 
tur in agris adjumentorum pabu/um; and thus it can be no other than 
the medium^ Tournefort and Bperhaave, as ufual, have no defcrip- 
tion, and confequently we cannot judge but from their quotations ; 
and if they knew the meaning of their authors, they certainly in- 
tended the alpefire. Yet Boerhaave has added Morif. 2. 139, i, which 
is certainly an error, as Morifon there treats of "Trifol. rubens /3. 

Among recent authors, I mean fuch as wrote after the reforma- 
tion of botany by Linnseus, and until he named the ^rifol. alpeftrey 
I have ftudied Van Royen, Haller, Scopoli, and Hudfon. The firft 
of theie has given us only the fpecific differences of his plants^ 
which afford no great information ; but ftill, in calling its folia 
§vat(hodIongay integerrima^ ht feems rather to hint at the 7r^/. medium. 
That Haller, Scopoli, and Hudfon had alfo this in view, is beyond a 
iJoubt, as I (hall foon prove. I will juft obferve here, that Haller, 
under this head> has not only brought in feveral varieties, which 
indeed 1 have not feen, but that appear to be different fpecies; but^ 
according to his ufual praftice, has injudicioufly huddled together 
a vaft number of fynonyms, particularly in his Stirpes Helvcticse, 
which belong to at leaft three feparate fpecies of Trifolium^ viz. 
rubens fij alpejlre^ and medium. 

Nearly the fame confufion is obfervable in his edition of 
Ruppius; for, after having copied the above-mentioned defcription 
of T^rifoU medium by that author, he adds a circumftance that belongs 
to the rubens. I have at leaft not yet feen any fpecies befides this 
laft, of which it can be faid,. vagmis petiotorum Jhralium lutioribus a 
vulgari pratenfi differt. That Haller alfo really meant the rubens^ I am 
further induced to believe, from his having,, in this edition, left out 

"Trifolium. 



ao8 Mr. AfzeliusV Bi/iory of 

Trifollum tnonianum^ Jpica Imgiffifna rubente^ C. B. which is found ia 
both the preceding ones; and alfo from his having added the 
figure of Rivinus, Tab. 12, which indeed reprefents the alpefire^ 
but for want of attention might eafily be miftaken for the ruhens ^. 

At laft Linnaeus introduced ^rifol. alpeftre into the fecond edition 
of Species Plantarum. But this, inftead of fettling the confufion, 
fcrved rather to increafe it. For, befidcs the genuine fynonyms of 
Clufius and J. Bauhin, he has alfo added the uncertain ones of 
Van Royen and C. Bauhin, together with fome obfervations^ 
which, though very brief, ftill unfortunately regard three diftin6t 
fpecies, viz. alpeftre^ medium, and praUnfe. Afterwards he inferted 
this into the twelfth edition of Syft- Naturae, with the following 
alteration — that the word fefjilibus in the fpecific charafter was left 
out, as was neceffary, when he confounded it with medium^ which 
frequently has pedunculated fpikes. A more ample defcription was 
alfo made, with a view of diftinguiftiing it from t\\^ pratenfe. But 
the diftinguiftiing marks, taken chiefly from the ftipulae, may fuit 
the alpeftre as well as the medium^ although this latter bears a ftronger 
refemblance to pratenfe than the former does. 

Of all the authors who from that time have treated of the Trifol. 
aipeftre^ I am not certain that any one befides Jacquin, AUioni, 
and perhaps Doerrien, had the real one in view. I fay nothing of 
Murray and Reichard ; as what they have inferted into their edi- 
tions of the Syftem, is nothing further than copies from the twelfth 
edition, except their having ftill more confounded it with the 
medium^ by quoting other authors, who were miftaken themfelves. 

Thus profeflbr Jacquin is the firft perfon to whom we are 
indebted for a perfeft and juft idea of ^rfol. alpeftre^ from his good 
figures and defcriptions, firft in his obfervations, and afterwards in 
his Flora Auftriaca* But his quotations are not all to the pur- 

pofe; 



three Species qfTrifoUum. 209 

pofe; for^ in ttiy opinion, independent of the equivocal C.Bauhin, 
neither Van Royen, Haller, nor Crantz are properly cited. Of the 
firft of thefe I have already fpoken ; and, with regard to the three 
latter,. Haller) meaning to diftinguifh his Trifolium from the pra-^ 
tenfe, mentions, indeed, nothing but what ferves for this purpofe ; 
neverthelefs, when he faysf that it hits vagina in latiufculafoliola ter^ 
minataj or JiipuUe lanceolata^ folia fuperni raro maadata^ calyx glaber^ & 
Jlorumfpica obejiory he can hardly intend this for any other than iw- 
^unu The fame is the cafe itith refpefl: to Crantz, who tells us-^ 
that bis plant b&3 caules rmojij angid^^ vagina petiolonm friis ruben^ 
tibuSjfoliafrferioraet.meSaintegerrimarfedfuperiora ciliato-ferrata^ and 
calyx ba/i demibufque coloratis ; all of which does not accord with the 
mlpeftre^ except that the vaginas. are fometimes^ though very feldom, 
marked with a few red (breaks, whereas thofe of the nudium are- 
almoft always fo. 

Before Jacquin, Rivinus had in the laft century given us a pretty 
good figure of "TrifoL alpeflre. But although Haller in his Stirpes 
Helvetica^ referred to him, he has neverthelefs happened afterwards 
to be conftantly overlooked j probably becaufe the plant was not well 
known until Jacquin publifhed his obfervations. Thus we have 
now three figures of this Trifolium, all of which are originaK 

Though profeffor AUioni has not given us any defcription, yet, 
as he has admitted into his Flora the Irifol. Jlexuofum of Jacquin, 
there is reafon to fuppofe his alpejire may be the real one ; though 
he alfo has quoted all the authors fet afide by Jacquin, and whom I 
have already mentioned; adding Scopoli likewife, who certainly 
means the ^rifol. medium^ though he terms it alpeflre ; for he fays 
that it has a cauUs fubangulatus^ folia fubtus paUidiara^ tumor callrfus 
inter ramos et caulem^ and calyx glaberjiriis rubris exaratus. 

Madame DoerrieUj^ as flie immediately .before mentions a Trifo- 

£ e liuim 



aro Mr. AFiBLius*/ Account if 

lium which appears to ht mediumy mtift certainly by her alpefire xxtt^ 
dcrftand another fpecies, and perhaps the true one ', at leaft Ihe 
defcribes the leaves as having (hort footftalks, and being deftitute 
of white fpots; and the teeth of the <:alyx^ efpecially the lowermolt, 
yery long and hairy. On: account of this laft cxpreflion, her plant 
might rather be fuppofed ^rifoL^rubens/i^hMt this ccmje6ture falls to 
the grou ndy when fhe fays that the h^ads of the flowers are 
poundifh. 

The other modern authors who have 'ti*ated of T'rijhl. alpejire^ 
icem all* to have errcd^ But as ia all probability they have not all 
had the fame fpecies in view, any m6re than- haiis been fhewii to 
have been. the cafe with the old writers, I proceed, in order to pre- 
fent in a clear point of view this plant, which all along has been fo 
confufedly dcfcribcd, to enumerate all the Tr^Ha with which from 
remoter times to the prefent day it has been confounded, and ^hrhich 
are the following^ viz. 

1. Tr (folium ruhens /3, 
As undoubted fynonyms of which 1 may mention here— 

Trifolium majus flore purpufeo. Qer. Bm. p, iiSd; 

a. t4.* . 
Trifoliura raontannm m^jus purpOreum* Park. Tbeatr. 
p, iioj, n* I. * Et Trifolium montanum majus flore 
purpureo. Ibid. p. 1104, n. i. fg.fup. iMegn 
Trifolium purpureum montanum majua fpica oblonga* 
Mor. H^. lu p. 139, n, i. * Et Trifolium Lagopoides 
montanum, 3* Clus^ Hid. fedl. a, tab. 12, kg. I^ 
^c. ord. 
All thefe^ authors exhibit one and the fame figure taken, fron^ 
Clufius ; and of which, in the next article of Trifol mediumy I fhall 
have an opportunity of fpeaking further^ As L have faid before, 
3 Gerard 






. U 



Gerard and Paikinlbn arte flited by Ray» and Morifon by Boer- 
haave. . ' -!; \ ' \ . 

To this [^ace might perhaps alfo be referred— ^ • 

vTrifQliuDa 4iod montanum majus. 'TbaL H«rc^ p. t2^^ (q. * 
.Trifdlivim ft>lipjo(igo flore purpyreo Riv. ,Ru^. Je^^ 

TtdcXma fpicjs fubglobofi? yiUpfis: n^^oni^HUibiis iefliUbiis» 
caule ^r^^^. fpliis. lancetdatis f^rrujatis. Gmel. Sib. iv. 
p. 32,n..;8Ck . 

'Hisdius and :Bja^pw9 I hiavirfaief<|tb nieof ioned ; and. liave ncfvf 
only to add, that HaUer ilfi> m. hisf.'Stiope^ 'Hdv!etica9 has iquoted 
the firft tinder TrifaL naiad 0, p. 584, n. li. f As to Gmetin^ it is 
indeed unoertain what he n^eant, as he hasadddd no 4efertptioa.; 
but if has q}30t»AQTk.sd:5tr^9fmti^\f/Slik^tikl^ ;be.'.true, 

his Tnfolitiaa b nifti/d^r(\'hot'rniittA ; St is^po^flUklf ;t^: thiiC 
he may have con^btijidbd thefis tyi^ ^»edi3^y<whiQh ^ jifejU'ly. ro- 
femble ^ach other, that miftakes n^ight eafily bfe n»adf^ «ia4 arf th^ 
tAore pardonable. Notwithftanding this»: they are really diftin^; 
ibr,:beri4cs the ^r'foUatm rubens being inigflMcal largv> itabaves 
are on both fides free from :hair&;and:.in. the edges they ai» fuiely 
ferrated by means of the veins running out into fmall curved points 
diredted towards the top, fliorter and longer alternately, exactly as 
in Trifol, mmisnumi both vaginae and ftipulae, particularly of the 
floral leaves, are mttch-'largeiyand not hairy; the former fwelHng^ 
and the latterfoirieWhat^ietruiatedt'tlie fpikes' in the be^nning 
feflile, and concealed within the floral vaginae,; exaftly as In ^rifiiL 
alpefire\ but afterwards they grow more or lefs pedunculated, oval,, 
oblong, or (^Undi^cal :' calyx fmiooth, t>ut its teeth hairy ; and the 
low^rmoil of thefc teeth are as long 'a$ the whole flower. 

• ■ . ■ .. « 

E e 4 %,, TrU 



ai2 Mr. AfzeliusV Account of 

a. Trjfolium.mdiidmj' 
Although I am but little furprifed at the earlier authors having 
fometimes miftaken the TnybJ. rumens for alpe/ire, I very much won- 
der that the modern ones could confound alpeftre with medium^ or 
regard this latter as the true aipejlre. Neverthdefs this has fre- 
quently been the cafe; for, after it had b^nndtoed by Linnaeus, I have 
found about twenty authors mentioning; a Trifcdium which they call 
alpeftre^ only two or perhaps three of whom, as I -have faid above, 
may with certainty be affirmed to have treated of the genuine one. 
Mpft of the rdl, to judge by their writings, have had the Trifol. 
medium in view, though, exdufive of its ftipulae'and the chara^er- 
iftics common to the whde ^nus, it bears very fmall refemblance 
to the alpe/ire : for its ftem is flexuofe, angular and ^ branched ; the 
fbotilalks longer and divaricated; the. leaves broader; the fpkes 
generally pedunculated ; calyirmoftly fmdothy and its teeth larger, 
&a . Whercias the ^rlfoL alpeftre has a ftraight^ round, and fimple 
item; fhort rfnd er66l footftalksj narrow and ftrongly veined leaves; 
fpikes conftantly fefiile ; a calyx always downy, and all over of the 
fame colour ; its teeth ihorter than thofe of the medium^ hxxt the 
Idwermoft one is proportidnably longer* . 

3. TrifoUum pratenfe. . 

Linnaeus fays of ^rifol alpeftre that it is ramis copi^mis luxwrians 
mffftis.; But I »am confident he never faw either thpalpefire or the 
medium^n a cultivated flate; and confequently that by this expreflion 
he points at th^ prate$ife^ which is commonly cultivated in Sweden 
as well as other countries ; and^ through cultivation, vjaries into 
fuch a refemblance to I'rifoL medium^ that, without ftridt and mi* 
nute examifiation, they can hardly be diftinguifhed* Stiil the /r^ 
tenfe has always caulcs bqfi adfcendcnUs^ and they are not flexuofe ; 

branches 



three SpeeJes of Trifolmm\ %i^ 

branches and leaves eredt^ but not divaricated \ vaginas and ilipulse 
much larger than thofe of the medium^ and the ftipulse terminating 
.in a fetaceous awn; the fpikes fmgle^ and without a peduncle; 
the flowers eretSt^ not divaricated; and the loweft tooth of the calyx 
far fhortcr than the tube of the corolla, &c. 
- As Linnseus confounded ^rtfol. medium with alpefiref^ and faw it 
growing in Sweden on all dry hills near forefts^ refecnbling the cul- 
tivated pratenfej we fee the origin and reafon of the above-mentioned 
expreflion, r^iw/f cofno/iffmis luxurians in fatis ; which however he af- 
terwards excluded, having probably obferved his miflake. How £ar 
the ^rrfol. alpejlre is fit for cultivation, I cannot determine ; bul^ as 
to medium^ I have reafon to think it is not. For I have obferved the 
fame fingularity refpciSling it which profefTor Jacquin mentions— 
that, when planted in gardens, in a good and loofe foil^ it generally 
grows more flender, and particularly its fpikes become fmaller; but 
on eminences, in a dry, hard, and uncultivated clay bottom, it grows 
fpontaneoufly very luxuriant, 

4. Trifolium parmmcum. 

To this I think may be referred — 

Trifolium alpeltre, Gouan. Illujlr. p. 52. * 

Many cultivated plants being feen producing variegated flowers, 
it has been fuppofed that the fame might alfo be the cafe with 
refpedi to the wild ones. Bi)t on ftri^er fearch it will be found, 
that in this point plants are moflly in the fame predicament with 
animals, the tame ordomeflicated individuals of which vary greatly 
as to colour, but hot the wild ones. It has alfo been difcovered 
that various plants with differently-coloured flowers, which have 
been long efleemed only varieties of each other, are really diflinft fpe- 
cies ; and that, on more minute examination, beiides the difference 

of 



tr4 Ma. AFzELius*i Account of 

of colour firft obfcrved, they alfo differ in other refpe6ts» particu- 
larly as to their parts of fru£lification. Thus when profeflbr 
Gouan fays of his ^rifol. alpeftre^ that it has Jkrts ocbroleuciy there is 
reafon tQ fufpe£t its not being the real one ; and as we have no 
other fpecies than the ocbroleucum^ pannomcuniy and mantanum^ which 
anfwer to this defcription^ and are otherwife as to their form and 
appearance nearly related to the alpefircj it may naturally be fup- 
pofed that he meant one of thefe three : now it cannot be either 
the ochroleucum or the montanutn^ as he has feparately mentioned 
thefe in the fame place j confequently his T^rtfol. oLpeJire muft either 
be the pamomcum^ or a new fpecies. 

TRIFOLIUM MEDIUM. 

If my conje6lure already mentioned refpe£ling Gefner be juft, he 

is the firft author who treats of this Trifolium. But the firft certain 

^account of it was given by Ray in his Hiftory ; and it is evident, 

from his defcription, that he meant the real one. As in its appear- 

.ance it refembles the pratenfcj he has juftly compared them togetheri 

/aying, that the medium is in all refpe6ts larger ; that the leaves are 

not always marked with white fpots, and that they have more con- 

fpicuous veins, particularly on the under fide; that the fpikes are 

more round, having long peduncles ; and that the flowers are of a 

deeper purple. But he commits an error in believing it to be the 

fame as that cultivated in meadows : yet he has altered this in th« 

firft edition of his Synopfis; and in the fecond he kept them feparate, 

as did alfo Dillenius in the third edition. He is the firft who added 

the fynonymous appellations of other authors, but unfortunately 

fixed upon thefe three, Clufius, J. Bauhin, and C.Bauhin, neither of 

whom meant the fame plant as he did, or the Yrifoh medium ; but, 

on the contrary, the^^^r^; efpeciajly the two firft> as is mentioned 

above. 

After 



ihree Species of TrjfoHum. ai5 

After Hay, this Trifolium was mentioned by Rnppius, Tourne- 
fort, Boerhaave, Van Royen, Haller, Wilfon, Scopoli, Hill, and 
Hndfon ; and thefe are the only writers I have found noticing it, 
before Linnaeus named it. Tournefort and Boerhaavc only quoted 
Ray, and mentioned his plant as fcparate from Trifolium nwntanum 
purpureum tnajus^ C. B. which latter, confequently, they could not 
take for the mediumi but rather for the alpejtre^ where, if it were to 
be cited at all, it ought to have its doubtful place. With refpe6t to 
Ruppius, Van Royen, Haller, and Scopoli, I have already faid what 
I thought neceffary, and that they have all miftakcn it for the 
alpeftre\ at lead in this refpeft, that under it they generally quoted 
fuch authors as meant the alpejire. The fame is done by Wilfon 
and Hill ; who, moreover, only copied what they found in the 
third edition of Ray's Synopfis. 

Mr. Hudfon, in his firft Flora Anglica, called it Trifol. medium^ 
giving it a new chara6ler, and adding the doubtful quotation of C. 
Bauhin, as well as the true one of Ray. Mr. Hudfon did not then 
know that Lmnaeus, a year ago, had given it the fame name in his 
Novitiae Florae Suecicae, which are fubjomed at the end of the 
fecond edition of his Fauna Suecica. At all events, it was not eafy 
to difcover what Linnaeus meant ; as he neither added character nor 
defcription, and afterwards neither mentioned the Trif medium any 
where in his works, nor referred to this place in the Novitiae* Th« 
extrication of this would alfo have been impoffible to any but 
Swedes who could go to Jumkil, where he fays this Trifolium 
grows. This place, which is famous for the number of its rare 
plants, is fituated about thirteen miles from Upfal. I have vifited 
it, and found there th? Trif medium. Befides, I have feen it under 
the fame name, by the authority of Linnseus, in all old Swedifh 
Herbariums, and efpecially in his own. Further, as it is in fome 

meafure 



2i6 Mr. Apzelius'j Account of 

meafure a medium fpecics between the alpefire and praUnfe^ I think 
I have reafon to prefer the oldeft name, and which was given by 
Linnaeus himfelf ; though he afterwards changed it for alpejire^ or 
rather confounded thefe two fpecies. Hence he fays, in the fecond 
edition of Species Plantarum, that TrifoUum alpefire grows alfo in 
Sweden ; whereas no other than the medium is found there. 

It appears as if Linnaeus had been led into this miftake by the 
ilipulae, which in both are fimilar, and very different from thofe of 
^rifol. pratenfcy though in other refpe6ts the alpefire and medium have 
few things in common. However, it feems as if fucceeding botanifts 
had generally regarded the IrifoL medium as the alpefire^ and con- 
founded the fynonyms of both ; whereas, neverthelefs, properly 
fpeaking, the medium has neither caulis ereSus^ nox folia lanceolatafer^ 
rulaia. But having in various authors obferved various notions of 
thefe and other terms, this ho longer appears Angular to me. At all 
events it is certain that the T^rifoU alpefire of all the Englifh bota- 
jiifts, of Crantz, Scopoli, Pollich, Leers, Muller, Retzius, Lieblein, 
and perhaps alfo of Gmelin, SchoUer, Mattufchka, Reichard, and 
Willdenow, is no other than the T^rifol. medium ; for I am informed 
that this latter only, and not the former, grows in England and 
Scotland, as Dr. Stokes has before obferved ; and the fame I can 
fay of Sweden, Denmark, and Norway. Befides, the figure of 
Muller plainly evinces that his STW/o/. alpefire is the medium. 

That Crantz, Scopoli, Pollich, Leers, and Lieblein have made 
the fame miftake, is evident from their defcriptions, as with regard 
to the two firft I have (hewn above ; and, as to the three latter 
authors, they compare their Trifolium with the pratenfe^ faying 
that its ftem is for the moft part deprcfled, or almoft lying on the 
ground (efpecially at the bafes), fomewhat angular, and furaifhed 
with joints ; the leaves are feldom fpotted, and are on the under 



three Species of ^rifoUunu a 17 

fide of a lighter green ; the flowers of a deeper purple, and the 
fpikes nearly globular. PoUich and Leers add, that they are larger, 
and genferally fhorter, or have longer peduncles, particularly when 
grown old; and that the calyx is moftly without hair, and marked 
with red-brown lines or nerves. But when Leers further adds, that 
X\itfoliola are lineart^lanceolata^ and cafytis denies brevijjimij infimo tubo 
corolla dlmdio breviore^ the former obfervation fuits better with "Trifol. 
alpe/lrcy and the latter with ^rifol. pratenfe. Lieblein has likewife 
made this remark on the teeth of the calyx, namely, that they are 
very fhort. 

SchoUer in his Flora, and Mattufchka in his Enumeratio, have 
only copied what Linnaeus has faid in the twelfth edition of his 
Syftem, under the head of TrifoL alpejire ; but Gmelin in his Stir p. 
Tubing., Reichard in his Flora, and Willdenow, have no defcrip- 
tion at all. In his Flora, Mattufchka has indeed faid many pretty 
things; all of which, however, are equally applicable to alpejire and 
to medium. Thus it is impoffible to determine, with any degree of 
certainty, what fpecies the Trifolium of thefe authors really is; but, 
if I am not much miftaken, they have all intended the medium. 
.This, however, I only fay by way of conje<5lure, leaving it to time 
further to elucidate this matter. 

With regard to Gorter, who inferted the Trifolium of Ray as a 
variety of pratenfe\ nor with regard to Nonne and Gattenhof, who 
have mentioned trifolium fpicis villojis foUis infidentibusy vaginarum 
caudis latioribusj Hall, and added the often-mentioned and doubt- 
ful fynonyms of C. Bauhin and Van Royen ; nor, laftly, with 
regard to Jenkinfon, who has taken up TrifoL medium probably 
from Mr. Hudfon, and only tranflated the chara6ter he gave of it 
into Englifh— -have I much more to fay. Though all thefe authors 
have no defcription, Nonne excepted, who has added that inaccu- 

F f rate 



2i8 Mr. AfzeliusV Hi/lory of 

rate obfervation of Haller^s, out of his edition of Ruppius^s Flora 
Jenenfis, of which I have made mention above, viz. that the 
vagina petiolorum foralium are broader than thofe of the TrifoL pra^ 
ienfe ; it ftill feems probable to me, that they all meant the Trifol. 
medium. 

At laft ProfefTor Jacquin has given us information concern- 
ing this Trifolium, by means of a feparate defcription, and a good 
figure of it, in his Flora Auftriaca, where he calls it flexuofum. 
But, though fifteen years have nowelapfed fince its publication, ftill 
I have found none but the Chevalier Murray, Profeffor AHioni, 
and Dr. Stokes, who have referred to it. The firft of them has 
placed it under alpefin^ though there were juft as good reafons for 
making this a diftinft fpecies as many other new plants which he 
has inferted in the fourteenth edition of the Syftem. Profeffor 
Allioni has faid no more concerning it, than that it grows in Pied- 
mont, and has an annual root; which remark furprifes me the more, 
as it is defcribed by all others to be perennial: a circumftance I can 
prove by my own experience. Dr. Stokes has given us pretty good 
obfervations on the fubjedl, coUeded from various quarters. Befidcs 
thefe three authors, no others who have written after the publica- 
tion of Profeffor Jacquin's figure, have attended to it, although 
they have meant the fame plant. Some of them had perhaps not 
then feen this figure, but all cannot plead this excufe. 

Thus^ though Profeffor Jacquin is the firft who has given us a 
proper idea of 7r//i medium^ and taught us to feparate it from the real 
alpejlrcy ftill \ cannot conceive but that he has confounded it, at the 
fame time, with another equally diftin6t fpecies: for he has quoted 
as fynonymous Trifolium majus iii, Cluf. and, to the beft of my 
judgment, this is the rubens j8. For this I will give my reafons, 
which I fhall chiefl.y take from the very defcriptlon of Clufius. 

He 



three Species of Trifolium. 219 

He fays of this Trefoil of his, that it is by far larger than the next 
preceding, viz. the alpejire ; that it has alfo thicker ftems ; that its 
leaves zxtjinata^ dorfo magis eminent eet elatOj laxa quadam veluti vagina 
caulem ampleSlentia^ duplo longiora et per oras deniiculata ; and, laftly, 
that the fpike is cblongior and major. All this, and efpecially what 
he fays of vaginae and foliola, does by no means agree with ^rifoL 
medium. He mentions, indeed, at the fame time, that the ftalks 
are nodoji^ or have genicular and that the calyx is hairy; but by the 
firft I do not believe he underftands any flexure but the joints 
(Hodi)^ which in the Trifol. rubens are larger than in any other, 
owing apparently to the very large, and as it were inflated, vaginae 
of the ftipulae. And as to the latter obfervation, the calyx of the 
^rifol. rubens is indeed always naked ; but fo is, for the moft part 
alfo, that of the medium. Still both of them have hairs on the teeth 
of the calyx ; but the rubens has thofe hairs both longer and in 
greater abundance; which, being divaricated, almoft cover the 
calyx, fo that at firft fight it appears to be all over hairy. Clufius 
therefore may be excufed for thus deficribing it. 

This author immediately after fubjoins his Trifolii majoris iii aU 
tera /pedes y of which he only obferves, that vel magnitudine\el foli^ 
orum et Jlorum forma aut colore^ nihil aut quam minimum differ t. Folia 
tamen angujliora illorum longitudinem aliquantum excedere videntur^ et Jlorum 
fpica longioreffe. This being by common confent Trifol. rubens a, the 
next preceding can be no other than the variety j8. For it is not 
probable that Clufius, who for his time was very accurate, fliould 
have found fo great a likenefs betvveen two plants fo different as 
T'rifoL rubens and medium are. Befides, as he has four fpecies of his 
"Trifol. majusj which he compares together, faying that, as to their 
external appearance, they are all fimilar ; the chain will be unin- 
terrupted, if they are fuppofed to be Trifolium montanum^ or perhaps 

F f 2 pannmcufHy 



220 Mr. Afzelius'j Hi/iory of 

pannomcum^ alpe^rt^ rubens /3, znd* ruiens a; but it will be broken if, 
iiiftead of ruhns j8, the medium is inferted, whole form and appear- 
ance are very different from all the other three. It is true, the 
figure of his TrifoUum majus iii. feems rather to referable, the medium 
than the rubensj being hairy and fomewhat branched. But the 
fame may be faid of his figure of TrifoUi majoris iii altera /pedes : 
and thus neither of thefe figures of Clufius can be taken for TrifoL 
rubens, or elfe both of them muft. I believe, however, the latter 
opinion is the fafeft, as his defcriptions fo well agree with TrifoL 
rubens y and as it is not yet perfectly certain whether this plant 
does not at times become branched. Laftly, as to the hairs which 
Clufius has reprefented in the edge of his figures, I believe they 
are rather meant to reprefent their fine teeth;, than any hsurinefs. 

Having endeavoured to prove that the Tri/o/ium majus iii of 
Clufius ought to be confidered as the fecond variety of ^r'lfal. ru^ 
bens with broader leaves and fhorter fpikes, I (hall conclude by 
citing a few fynonyms, as an addition to thofe quoted in the pre- 
ceding article of TrifoL alpejire. Thefe are— 

Trifolium maximum purpureo flore. Cluf. Pann. p. 760, 
n. 3. * Et Trifolium majus iii. Ibid. p. 762. Et gufd. 
Hjft. vi. p. 245, n. iii *. 

Trifolium fpica oblonga rubra. Bauh. Pin. p. 328. Ray^ 
Hiji. i. p. 944, n. 7. * 

Trifolium purpureum majus, folio et fpica breviore. Bauh. 
HiJi. ii. p. 375, fig. inf. 

Trifolium majus tertium purpureum, Clufio. Bauh. Utfi. 

ii- A 375- * 

The figure of John Bauhin, as well as thofe of Gerarde, Par- 

kinfon, and Morifon, as already mentioned, are only re-impreffions 

of the original of Clufius, whofe defcription is likewife copied in 

6 part 



three Species of Trifolium. Ml 

part by Gerarde and Parkinfon, but entirely by Ray, Morifon, and 
J. Bauhin in the laft-mentioned place, where it is not accompa- 
nied by a figure. But this the author has inferted in the former 
place along with the figure of "Trifol. rubens «, which variety he 
has alfo defcribed there himfelf. Dr. Stokes, after the example of 
Profeffor Jacquin, has quoted under his Trifolium flexuofumy not only 
the figure of Clufius, but alfo thofe of Gerarde, Parkinfon, and J. 
Bauhin, to which he has added another by Parkinfon, which re- 
prefents the upper part of TrifoL pannonicum^ or elfe the montanum. 

TRIFOLIUM PR A TENSE. 

Although we have but few figures of TrifoL alpejire and medium^ 
viz. three of the former and two of the latter,^ thofe of the pratenfe 
are more numerous. If I were to fay I had feen upwards of 
fixty myfelf, it might perhaps, true as it is, found extravagant. Of 
thefe, fifteen or fixteen may be efteemed originals, and all the 
others either copies, or only re-imprefllons from the fame plates of 
thofe publiflied before. This laft was moft cuftomary in the two 
laft certturies. And thus thefe figures conftitute feveral fets, 
Which I fhall briefly touch on, adding a few obfervations on their 
merit, and how far they may deferve to be quoted. 

In an old book called Ortus Sanitatis, printed at Venice, 1426, 
in folio, appears a Trifolium, which I fuppofe to be meant for the 
pratenfe ; though, from the barbarifm of thofe times, both figure 
and defcription are.fo indifferent, that nothing certain can be af- 
firmed refpefting them. In the defcription, feveral fpecies certainly 
are confounded; aijd the figure, though the foliola referable 
thofe of 7r//(?/. pratenfe^ and the fpike is feflSle between the floral 
leaves, ftill erroneoufly reprefents two oppofite leaves nearly in the 
middle of the ftem*. In a later edition of this book, publiflied 15 17, 

occurs 



1122 Mr. AfzeliusV HiJIory of 

occurs the fame figure and defcription. In the third tome of 
Brunfelfii Herbarium, printed in Latin at Stralh^irg, 1536, in folio, 
I have feen another and better figure; which, under the name of 
Brunella^ feems to reprefent TrifoL pratenfe. Still the figure is not 
diftincl enough to enable me to judge of it with abfolute cer- 
tainty. 

But the firft evident figure of this Trifolium that I have feen, 
is found in Roefslin's Herbal, printed in German, at Frankfort on 
the Mayne, by Egenolphus, 1532, in folio. It is fmall, but re- 
prefents the plant tolerably with one fingle ftem, with proper 
leaves, and a feflile fpike. Of this figure I have found thirteen re- 
impreflions, which are in Egenolphi Imagines et Effigies, a work 
which contains only figures, and of the former of which there are 
three editions ; in Dorftenii Botanicon, in two places, under the 
name both of Epithymum and Trifdlium ; in both the Latin editions 
of Diofcorides by RyfF or Rivius ; and in the Hiftory of Lonicerus 
in Latin, as alfo in his German Herbal, of which I have feen two 
editions, under UfFenbach's name; and in this century, another by 
Ehrhart. The figures of Egenolphus and Rivius, as alfo thofe of 
Lonicerus himfelf, are in general coloured. 

Fuchfen, or, as he is more commonly called, Fuchfius, in his 
Hiftory in Latin, printed at Bafil, 1542, in folio, gave us a new 
and a good figure of this Trifolium, reprefented in its natural fize 
and pofition, with feveral ftems ; and it is not much to our ho- 
nour that this is ftill almoft the beft extant. The only thing 
that might be faid again ft it, is, that a few of the fpikes are repre- 
fented pedunculated, and the floral leaves are not always oppofite 
and feflile, as they ought to be. Of this figure we have a coloured 
re-impreflion in the German Herbal of this author ; of which af- 
terwards, firft Tragus in his Hiftory, and after him Dodonarus in 

his. 



three Species of Trifolium. 223 

liis Imagines, have each given us a copy on a fmallcr fcale, en- 
graved fo that the figure is reverfed. Neither of them can be called 
good, but that of Dodonaeus is the beft ; and of this we find a re- 
impreffion in the fecond edition of his Imagines, as alfo in the 
French, Dutch, and Englifli tranflations of his Pemptades, and in 
both editions of Turner's Herbal. At laft Joha Bauhin, in his 
Hiftory, has given us a new and fmall copy of the figure of Fuchfius, 
altered for the worfc, though not reverfed. 

Matthiolus, in his Commentary on Diofcoridcs, publifhed 
in Latin at Venice, 1554, in folio, began a new fet of figures. 
He reprefents the plant, diminiflied, pretty well, with many 
ftems from the fame root ; but, as to the floral leaves, he has 
committed the fame fault with Fuchfius, and rather in a 
greater degree. It appears to me as if he had had the figure of the 
latter by him when he made his own, for they have an imperfe6t 
refemblance to^ each other, except that the figure of Matthiolus 
has the points of the foliola rounder, and the fpikes longer. This 
figure has afterwards been reprinted, or with more or lefs va* 
riation copied, in various works. Exa6t re-imprefliions of it I have: 
feen in the fecond Latin edition of the Commentary of Matthiolus, 
in the Latin Compendium of the fame author, in the French 
tranflation by Moulin, and the Italian one by Coftantini, and. 
another later in the fame language; further, in the Hiftoria Lug- 
dunenfis, which Linnaeus calls Dalechampii, and the French tranf- 
lation of it ; and, laftly, in the Diofcorides in Spanifti, by De La- 
guna. It muft be remarked that Matthiolus, in his Compendium, 
has committed two errors ; firft, in tranfpofing the figures of 
^rifol. pratenfe and monianum ; and, fecondly, that in the defcription 
belonging to the latter, but inferted under the former, he mentions. 
k as having purple flowers. 

0£ 



1 



224 ^^^* AfzeliusV Hiflory of 

Of the copies of Matthiolus's figures I have feen three kinds. 
A larger one, in the Latin edition of his Cominentary, in 1565, 
Ibmewhat improved, and reprefenting the plant nearly in its na- 
tural fizc : this has been copied in the Italian tranflations of this 
work, in the years 1568 and 1604. Secondly, one of the fame fize 
with the original, in the Latin Epitome of Matthiolus, by Game- 
rarius ; but iniferior in this refpe£t, that all the fpikes are repre- 
fented oval, and pedunculated^ orwithout floral leaves. Neverthelefs 
•it has been reprinted by UfFenbach in his German tranflation of 
Durantes's Herbario, by Becker in his Pamaflus, and by Zvingc- 
rus in his Theatrum, both of them in Qerman. Thirdly^ one 
kind much fmaller than the original one, but otherwife perfeftly 
fimilar, found in the French tranflations of Matthiolus's Com- 
mentary, by Pinet* Camerarius has altered one of the above- 
mentioned faults committed by Matthiolus in his Compendium, 
and reftored the figures of Trifol. pratenfe and montanum to their 
right places; but he has retained the other, faying, that TrifoL 
montanum has purple flowers. 

Another fet of figures of the ^rifol. pratenfe originated with 
Tabernaemontanus, in his Herbal, printed in'German at Frankfort 
on the Mayne, 1588, in folio. His figure is of the fame fize as 
the original or firft one by Matthiolus, to which it bears fome re- 
femblance; but is better in this refpedl, that all the fpikes are fur- 
niflied with clofe floral leaves, which however rather appear to 
reprefent a large calyx than real leaves. Re-impreflions of this 
figure I have feen in eight places, viz, in Tabernsemontani Icones, 
and four later editions of his Herbal, the firfl of which was pub- 
liflied by Gafper Bauhin, and afterwards reprinted; the third by 
Hieron. Bauhin, likewife reprinted in this century ; further in 
Gerarde's Herbal, and in Gafper Bauhin's edition of the Commen- 
tary 



f^ee Species ef Trifoliump %2$ 

tarjr pf Matthiolus ia Latin^ of which I have feen a fubfcquent 

edition. 

The ten remaining figures of Trifol. pratenfe are all to be regarded 
as originals, and are pubiifhed by Rivinus, Zannichelli, the author 
of S'peftade de la Nature, BlackweU, Weinman, Kniphof, Knorr^ 
Regnault, Zorn, and Profcflpr VahL All thefe are genuine in this 
refpcfl: — that they are intended to reprefentthe honey-fuckle Tre* 
foil, as is evident from their pofture, ftipulae, foliola, and clofe 
ik>ral leaves, &c. But that of Kniphof is, as ufual, a very poor 
one ; which indeed I would have pafled over in filence, but that 
it has been referred to by more than one author. The figures of 
Zannichelli, Weinman, and Zorn are fomewhat better ; and thofe 
of Blackwell and Regnault tolerably good: but both thefe 
authors, as well as Zom, have been unfortunate in reprefenting 
the fegments of the calyx very different from nature. The figures 
of Rivinus and Knorr are pretty good. That in Speft. de la 
Nature is an indifferent one, and appears to be made from 
the cultivated variety : indeed it is pity that the otherwife good 
figure of ProfeflTor Vahl feems to be alfo drawn from a 
cultivated fpecimen; for the whole of its pofture nearly ap* 
proaches to that of TrifoL medium^ the leaves being too much 
pointed to reprefent the wild plant. But its principal diftin- 
guiihing chara6):6riftics, the broad and awned ftipulas, as well af 
the feffile fpike placed between two oppofite temate ieffile leaves^ 
are very well cxprefTed. 

Of all the figures now mentioned, Linnasus himfelf has^ 
quoted none but that of Camerarius, in both editions of the 
Flora Suecica and Species Plantarum ; that of John Bauhin 
only in Hortus Cliffortianus ; and that of Rivinus alone in 
kis firfl; Flora. To particularize which of thefe figures all 

G g other 



aa6 Mr. AfzeliusV Hi/iory of 

other authors have referred to, would be too tedious ; it fuffices 
to mention, that I have feen a few of each fet quotod, but, 
what is furprifing, nioftly thofe of inferior merit; whereas 
the good one of Fuchfius has been in this century quoted by no 
one but Haller and Dr. Stokes. 

It feems, therefore, that the Trtfol. pratenfe^ as having been 
known from the earlieft ages, and being one of the mod common 
plants in Europe, ought to have been exempt from the confufion 
in which many others are involved, and which is more excufabic 
when fome rare or lefs known plant is in queftion. Still it ftands 
unfortunately in the fame predicament ; and Cafpar Bauhin, ac- 
cording to his ufual practice, began the confufion : for his ^nfo^ 
Hum pratenfe purpureum^ with his perplexed defcription and mifplaced 
citations, comprehends at lead three diftindl fpecies, befides the 
genuine pratenfe i under which laft his Trifolium pratenfe purpureum 
is generally quoted by moft authors, who thereby have authorifed 
the blunder of Bauhin, not to mention other feparatc miftakes 
committed by fome of them. I therefore efteem it neceffary in this 
place to enumerate all the plants which I have found miftaken 
for the trtfol. pratenfe^ or confounded with it. But I (hall previoufly 
fpeak of 

Trifolium pratenfe purpureum minus, foliis cordatis. Ray. 
Syn. iii. p. 328, n. 5. ♦ tab. 13, fig. i. 

This Haller has introduced as a different fpecies in his Stirp. 
Helv. p. 585, n. 13*, but in his Hift. i. p. 164, n. 378*, he has 
inferted it as a variety of another Trefoil, which certainly is the 
ecbroleucum ; and on the other hand adduced the authors really be- 
longing to this latter, under TrifoL pratenfe^ as I am going to ob- 
ferve. Linnaeus, probably mifled by Haller, has alfo brought in 
this plant of Ray's, under his l^rifoL ocbroleucumy in Syft. Nat. 

tom» 



<f« . 



three Species of Trjfolium. larj 

torn, iii. p. 233. ♦ But the Engli(h botanifts, who ought to be 
better acquainted with it, feparate it from the T^rifoL ochroleucum^ 
iince, befides other differences, it has purple flowers; and they make 
it a variety of TrifoL pratenfey on account of its having a fimiiar, 
though ftarved appearance; .the flipula& being in like manner 
awned, and the teeth of the calyx likewife nearly equal, as Dr. 
Sibthorp and Mr. Hudfon have informed me. But it differs in 
other refpe6ts very materially; having the leaves oppofite ; the fo- 
liola fmall^ fhort, and inverfely heart^fhaped ; and the peduncle 
very long, and deflitute of floral leaves. 

The other plants that have been confounded with IrlfoL pra^ 
tenfe^ though widely differing from it, are the following, viz. 

I. Melampyrum arvenfe. 

Trifolium majus; Brunf. Herb. torn. iii. p. 47. 
This paffage in Brunfels, Cafpar Bauhin has quoted under his 
trifolium pratenfe purpureum. But to judge from the figure annexed, 
for there is no fuch thing as defcription, the plant is by no mean& 
any Trefoil, though called fo, but certainly a Melampyrum ; as 
John Bauhin has already remarked in his Hiftoriay tom. ii. p. 375, 
and which Haller in his Stirp. Helv. p. 626, n. 2/ has taken for 
the arvenfe^ which indeed it appears to be. This figure of Brun- 
fels's is a re-impreffion of one in his Herb. ii. p. 58, where it has 
only obtained a German name. 

2. Trifolium repens. 

Trifolium pratenfe. Lob. Adv. p. 380. Hiji. p. 493. (ed* 

Lat. 1576.) P. ii. p. 35. (ed. Belg. 1581.) Icon. ii. p. 

29. Dodod. Pempt. p. 556. (ed. 1583.) p. 565. (ed. 1616.) 

€t p. 898. (ed. Belg. 1644.) Ger. Ejoac. p. 11 85, n. u 

G g 2 Trifolium 



228 Mr. ApzeliusV Hijlary of 

Trifolium pratcnfc vulgare purpnrcum. Parh Tbeatr. 
p^ mo, n. I. 

Lobel, in his Adverfaria, has indeed no figure; and gives a dc- 
fcription which comprehends at leaft two fpecies, the Trifol. repens 
and pratenfe. But that he chiefly had the repens in view, appears 
from his fubfequent Hiftoria or Obfervatiohes, in which he has 
given a pretty good figure of this plant, and at the fame time re- 
ferred to the above-mentioned Adverfaria. Of this original figure 
by Lobel, re-impreflions have afterwards been made in all the above 
works. It bears fo near a refemblance to the Trifol. repens^ as to 
leave us no room to doubt : and for this rcafon it appears to mc 
the more furprifing, that fo many both ancient and modem authors 
could refer to it for the pratenfe^ which it in no manner refembles. 
Thus I have feen Lobel cited by Cafpar and John Bauhin, by Mori- 
fon, by Haller, in Stirp. Hclv. and by Knorr; Dodonseus by Haller, 
both ia his Stirpes and Hiftoria, by Linnseus, in both the editions 
of Flora Suecica, by Gorter, in. both the editions of Flora Belgica, 
by Knorr, in his Thefaurus, by Mr. Hudfon, in the laft editicm of 
Flora Anglica, and by Profeffor Vahl, in Flora Danica ; Gerarde 
by Mr. Hudfon, in both the editions of his Flora, and by the Rev^ 
Mr. Kelhan, in the Flora Cantabrigienfis ; and, laftly, Parkinfon 
by Ray, both in his Hiftoria, and in all the three editions of his 
Synopfis, by Haller, in his Stirpes, by Wilfon, Hill, and Mr« 
Hudfon, in both places. 

Haller happened fir ft, either by an error in writing or printing, 
to mifquote the laft Latin edition of Dodonsei Pemptades, viz. 
p. 365 inftead of 565 ; and, after him, this fault has been invariably 
copied by all the above-mentioned authors, except Gorter, who 
altered it in the laft edition of his Flora Belgica. Haller -alfo re- 
commends the figure by Dodonaeus as a good one, but Crantz cri- 

ticifes 



three Species of TrifoHum. 229 

ticifei it as bad; and Dn Stokes is the firfl: who has remarked 
that this, as well as thofe by Lobel^ Gerarde, and Parkinfon, does 
not belong to ^rifoL pratenfe^ but to repens. 

Gerarde, in his Herbal, has a genuine figure as well as defcription 
of Trifol. pratenfe ; the former taken from Tabemasmontanus^ as I 
have faid above. But Johnfon, who publifhed a new^ and) as \\\m^ 
felf called it^ improved edition of Gerarde, thought this figure not 
jgood enough ; and therefore inferted in its room the figure above 
cited, which reprefents the I'rifol. repens^ and is borrowed either 
from Lobel or Dodonaeus ; at the fame time retaining Gerarde's 
defcription : and thus unluckily confounded plants fo different as 
the creeping and purple Trefoil arc. Parkinfon, who afterwards 
publifhed his Theatrum^ copied the lafl edition of Gerarde ; and» 
as he faw the flowers were there defcribed purple, he thought it 
beft to infert that circumflance in the very title : by this means 
the white ^rifoh repens came to be called by him purpureum. 

3* ^rifoHum ocbroleucum. 

Trifolium montanum majus, fiore albo fulphurea Merr. 

Pin. p. 121. 
Trifolium lagopoides annuum hirfutum, pallida luteum 

feu ocbroleucum. Mor. Hifi. xu p. 141, n. 12. ♦ Et 

Trifolium lagopoides, fl. ochroleuca Ibid. fe6t« 2, tab. 

12, fig. 12. 
Trifolium pratenfe hirfutum majus, flore albo fulphureo 

feu ochroleuco. Rcy. Hiji. L p. 943, n. 8. * £t Syru 

iii. p. 328, n. 3. ♦ 
Triphylloides alpina, flore albo. Pouted. Antbol. p. 241.* 
Trifolium Lagopoides flore fubluteo* Faill. Par. p. 195, 

n. 5. 

AH 



%2P Mr. ApzeliusV Hijcry of 

All thcfe five authors Haller has quoted in his Stirp. Hclv^ 
p. 586, under var. jS, flore albo of TrifoL pratenfe. But in his His- 
tory, torn. i. p. 164, he has only cited Morifon and Ray under var. J^, 
flore ochroleuco, of the fame Trefoil. Of this laft, Linnaeus alfo 
in the beginning confidered the plant of Pontedera to be a variety, 
as appears from his Flora Lapponica and Hortus ClifFortianus ; 
but afterwards he juftly omitted this quotation. 

That Merrett's Trifolium is the ochroleucum^ is very probable from 
its being a native of England ; and that Ray meant the fame, is 
evident beyond doubt from his defcription : but with refpe£t to 
Morifon, the matter is not fo clear ; for both his defcription, in 
which occur the terms folia acuta^ and his figure, which reprefents 
the leaves narrow, lanceolate, and pointed inftead of rounded at 
the ends, appear rather to indicate the TrifoL parmonicumy though 
the fpecimen in Bobart's colle6tion at Oxford is I'rifoL acbroleucum. 
It is far more difficult to make out what Pontedera aimed at ; for, 
from his prolix defcription, nothing further can be concluded, 
than that the leaves, principally in the margin, as well as the whole 
calyx, are hairy; the flowers white and monopetalous; and that 
the feed-veflels generally contain one feed. Hence it follows, how- 
ever, that his plant can neither be I'rifoL repens nor montanum : 
and, iiklependent of thefe two, I can think of no other capable of 
being called in queftiont except the Trifol. ochrokucum and pamtoni^ 
cum. But, as the above-mentioned chara<5lers are equally applica- 
ble to both of them, and as thefe two laflt-mentioned plants them- 
felves are fo nearly related as to be fcarcely diftinguifhable but by 
their fize, and the {hape of their leaves, it is impoflible to determine 
which of them Pontedera had in view. The plant of Vaillant is 
ftill more diflBicult to afcertain, for he has given no defcription at 
alL ^ 

4. rri^ 



three Species of TrifoUum. 231 

4* Jrifolium montanum. 
Trifolium pratcnfe ii* Dur. Herb. p. 1014. {ed. Germ. 
Uffenbath. 1619. Franc, ad Moen. 4^.) 

This Trefoil, which undoubtedly is the mantanumy C Bauhin 
has quoted under his trifolium pratenfe purpureum. But as he is in 
every refpe6fc inaccurate, he has termed it Trifolium pratenfe alterum\ 
and called his author by his Chriftian name Cqflorey inftead of his 
furname Durante^ ^ 

In all old authors, the Trifol. montanum always follows after 
the pratenfe^ under the name of album or acutum^ or elfe, which is 
the moft common, pratenfe alterum or pratenfe album : and the 
figures of it have likewife had the fame fate and changes, as 1 have 
before mentioned of thofe of the pratenfe. However, the montanum 
was not fo early known; for it does not occur in Roefslin's Herbal, 
nor in the firft edition of Egenolphi Imagines, or of Loniceri Hif- 
toria. Among this fet of figures it appears for the firft time in 
RyfF's edition of Diofcorides, printed at Frankfort on the Mayne, 
by Egenolphus, in 15439 folio : otherwife, the firft figure I have 
feen of it is in Fuchfii Hiftoria publiflied the preceding year. This 
is not G^y good, but the beft of thofe that have fallen under my 
infpedtion. 

While on the fubjeft of Trifol. montanum^ I muft not pafs over 
in filence the careleffnefs of G. Bauhin with refpeft to this plant, 
as indeed to almoft all others : for he has quoted Trifolium majus 
I. CbiJ. Pann. p. 761, and Hijl. vi. p, 245, both under his Trifolium 
montanum album^ Pin. p. 328, which probably is the genuine monta- 
num \ and under his Trifolium pratenfe alburn^ Pin. p. 327, which all 
authors have taken for the repens. Further, under this his Trifo- 
Bum pratenfe alburn^ he has cited Fuchfius, Matthiolus, Lonicerus, 
Turner, Camerarius, and Laguna, all of whom certainly meant the 

5 ^^if^^^ 



a3» Mr. AfzeliusV Wfiory of 

^rifoL tnontanum ; Lobelii Adverfaria, and Thalius, who appear to 
have had the repens in view^ at lead Lobel ; Durante^ who has 
drawn the Trifol. pratenfe ; and, laftly, Tragus and Dodonaeus, who 
on this fub)e6t are fo inexplicit, that I cannot determine their 
meaning. The queftion is then, where is the Trifolium pratenfe 
album of Bauhin to be quoted, whether under repensj pratenfcj or 
tnontanum f I think, moft probably under theJaft-mentioned, if at 
all; as moft of the authors quoted by him had this fpecies in view. 

5^ Trifolium^ an incamatumf . 

Trifolium pratenfe purpureum vulgare. Mar. Hi/l. ii. p. 
138, n. 5. * Et Trifolium pratenfe purpureum* Ibid. 
kOi. 2, tab. 12, fig. 6. 

This plant of Morifon's, generally taken for Irifol. pratenfe^ I 
have feen cited in three different manners. Boerhaave in the fecond 
edition of his Hortus Lugdunenfis, Haller in his Stirp. Helv. and 
Seguier in his Plantse Veronenfes, mention the page without 
taking notice of the figure ; whereas Lightfoot and Relhan only 
refer to the figure. Linnaeus quotes both. 

As Morifon under the defcription has not direded us to the figure, 
norat thefaid figure referred to the body of thework for a defcription 
of it, we are very uncertain whether in thofe two places he had the 
fame plant in view. His confufed defcription, which is for the moft 
part borrowed from G. Bauhin, affords but trifling orrather no infor- 
mation. And although Morifon, in thus confounding feveral fpecies 
together, may ftill have meant to point at the true T'rifoL prattnfcj yet • 
his figure will by no means fuitthat plant; but rather refemblesTr^ftZ. 
incamatum^ and perhaps it is even drawn from this fpecies: but, if fo, 
it betraysgreatcarelefTncfs in Morifon, whohas, in two places befides, 
dcfcribed and drawn the laft-mentioned Trefoil; viz. under trifo^ 

Hum 



three Species of ^rifoUunu 233 

lium purpnreum et . annuum^ folio htrfuto rotundo^ Trifolii pratenfis albi 
formay Mon Hift. ii. p. 140, n. 3. ^* Et Trifol. lagopoides "Trifolii 
pratenfis folioy Ibid, fe6t, 2, tab. 12, fig* 3. And under T'rifolium 
purpureum lagopoides hirfutum annuum rotund if olium^ fpica diluii ruiente^ 
Mon Hift. ii, p, 140, n. 6, * Et Tr folium lagopoides rotund f. hirfut. 
Ibid, fe6l, 2, tab. 13, fig, 6, a leaf only. The complete figure re^ 
prefents "Trifol. anguJiifoHum. This Linnaeus has not quoted ; but 
the whole of the paflage immediately preceding, which belongs to 
Trifol. incarnatum^ he has inferted under his Trifol. fquarrofum. 

Finding myfelf unable to extricate this conf ufed TrifoUum pratenfe 
pttrpureum of Morifon's, I wrote a letter fome time ago to Profeffor 
Sibthorp at Oxford, alking the favour of him to examine the old 
Herbariums under his care, in order to difcover whether they might 
not throw fome light on the matter. His anfwer is as follows : 
^* The plant in Bobart's Herbarium, under this title of Morifon's, 
*^ is Trifol. ochroleucumi which, however, as I never faw it with 
** purple flowers, I can fcarcely think Morifon meant. But there 
<< is a paflage in the defcription of his Trifolium lagopoides anr 
*^ nuum hirfutum pallide luteum feu ochroleucum, p, 141, n, 12, 
^* which feems to point at his Trifolium pratenfe purpureum ; 
** namely. Vide ejufdem iconem in tab. duodecimal ante lagopoides penna-- 
** tum^ et refer but propter colorem^ extra gregem Trifoliorum fpicatorum 
*^feu lagopoideorum flore purpureo illic donatorum. The figure I confefs 
" has a confiderable refemblance to that of Trifol. incarnatuta ; 
^ but this has an annual, not a perennial, root/' 

6, Trifolium mihi ignotum. 

Trifolium pratenfe, GmeL Tubing, p, 227. * 
This is quoted by Reichard in his Syftema Plantarum ; but as 
Gmelin fays that it has caulis procumbens^ folia lanceolata^ and capi- 

H h tulum 



1 



^34 M** ArzELivB^s SSjlcry of 

tulum folharium aut geminumj there is reafon to doubt its being 
7r//i/. fratenjt\ but when he further adds, that it hz^^Jlipula lineare$ 
irtnata^ it is evident he cannot mean this fpecies. Had he not at 
the fame time made feparatc mention of T^rifol. rubem^ I ftiould 
have fuppofcd he here hinted at it under the wrong name of pra^ 
fenje. At leaft I do not for my part know of any other fpecies with 
crenated ftipulas^ which Gmelin can poffiWy have intended. 



HAVING thus finiflied the hiftory of the Tnfolmm aTpeflrey 
medium^ and pratenfe^ and pointed out with what plants^ they 
have in former, as well as prefent times, been confounded, it re- 
mains for me to defcribe them botanically, and under each to^ 
kifert the proper fynonyms. With a view of duly diftinguifhing, 
the ^rifoL atpejlre and medium^ which have always been miftaken 
for one another, I fhall bring in all the authors I have feen that 
mention them* But with refpeA to "frifd. praUtfi^ 1 think 1 need 
only take notke of thofe who have ekher figures or defcriprions^ 
or who have been cited by Linnaeus and Reichard ; and yet their 
number is fo very great, that I almoft fear to mention them. In 
order to prevent all fuYther conf ufion in future^ I have found it 
neceflary to give each of thefe Trefoils a new character, as their 
prefent fpecific differences are not fufficient to diftinguiOi them 
from all others, ftill lefs from one another* I fhaJl now retain the 
fame order as above, fmce I think that to be the moft natural. 

!• Trifolium {dpejfrij fpicis denfis, coroDis fuba^ua* 
libus, ftipulis fetaceis divergentibus, folioUs lanceo* 
latis^ caidibus ftriiStis fimpliciflimis. 

Trifolium. 



three ^ecies ef TrifoKum. 135 

Trifolium alpcftre. Linn. Spec. Plant, ed. 2, p. io8a. * 
Syjl. Nat. ed. 1%, torn. ii. p. 50a.* Mara. Plant, ii. 
p. 451. Murr. Syft. Veg. ed. 13, /. 573, * et ed. 14, 
/. 688. * Rekb. Syft. Plant. P. iii. p. 553. * Jacqu. 
Obf. iii. p. 14, * tab. 64. et Fl. jiufir. voL v. p. is^feq. * 
tab. 433. jillion. Pedem. torn. i. p. 304, n. iioi. 
Trifolium majus purpureo fiore iL Cluf. Pann. p. 760. * 
Trifolium majus iL Cbif. Hjft. libr. vi. p. 7u^^^ * 
Trifolium majus Clufii feaindum, non alburn^ fed ru- 

brum. Bauh. Htft. torn, ii, /• 375. * 
Trifolium xoontanum purpureum majus^ C. B. Ray. Hifi. 
torn. i. p. 944, n. 6* * Tournef. In/lit. p. 404. BperL Lugd. 
ed. 2, P. iL p. 3O9 n. i. 
Trifolium foL long^ fl* purp* Rivin. Tetr. tab. xx^fig^Jm. 

T)ubla. 
Trifolium alpeftrc. Doerr. Najf. p. 236, n. 7. ♦ 
Trifolium moirtanum purpureum majus. Bauh. Pifu 
p. 328. 

Habitat in locis ficcis montanis fjlvatids Mungarise^ Auftria^^ 
Bohemijc, Moravise, Stiriae, Clufiusy Jacquin^ Pedemontii, Allimi^ 
ct forfan NaffovisB, Doerrien. 

Radix oblique ddcendens^ infra tellurem repens^ f ufca. 

Caules iXn6k\y fimplicifTimit tereteSf pallide virides. 

Stipulalong^^ fetaceac, uni^nerves, villofae, cauli approximatae^ a ie 
invicem divergentes, vagmantes t vaginis anguftatis, fcmiam- 
plexicaulibus, margine utrinque re6tis, initio villofis ciliatifquc, 
dein glabris et vix nifi in finubus inter ftipulas petiolumque 
ciliatis. 

PetioU fubscquales, breviflimi, longitudine ftipularum, ere6li. 

Hh a Foliola 



236 Mr. AfzeliusV Bj/iory of 

Foliola fubaequalia, ejufdem figura?, linearWanceolata, acutiufcula 
et fafciculo.pilorufn ttrminata ; fupra evidentius fubtus obfo* 
letius venofa, verfus. oras e crebrioribus majoribufque venis 
concurrentibus quafi ftriata; margine ad taftum fcabra, oculis 
nudis fubintegerrima, fed armatis fubtiliter denticulata, et 
paucis brevibufque pilis inftrufta; 

5j^/c^,ovalis, vel folitaria et feflilis intra folium florale dependens^ 
vel plerumque gemina, et turn altera in proprio folio breviter 
pedunculata feriufque florens praecociorem deprimit. 

Flores ere6li, denfe imbricati. • 

Pcrianthium villofiffimum, ochroleucum ; ftrfis parum obfcuriori- 
bus. Denies pallide virides, fuperiores bini sequalfes et tubo peri- 
anth ii breviores, inferior es bini etiam aecju ales fed fuperioribus 
pauI6 longiores et tubum perianthii ut plurimum asquantes,. 
infimus longitudine tubi corollae fed proximis dentibus dupla 
longior et interdum idtra. 

Corolla inodora> tota faturate purpurea t a.Iis vexillo vix breviori- 
bus, caring vero parum longioribus. 

Congruit qua ftaturam et habitum praefertim Trifoliis rubentiy 
montano et fannonicOy quas vero ab illo fatis difierunt; 
nempe — 

Rubens vaginis inflatis flipulifque fubferratis multo majoribus ; 
foliolis fprnulofis e venis excurrentibus in hamulps ad apicem 
fblioli verfos, alternos minores; fpicis longis pedunculatis ; pe- 
rianthio glabro, dentibus quatuor fuperioribus bafi dilatatis 
breviiTimis, inferioribus binis paullul6 longioribus, infimo fili- 
formi, longitudine totius coroUde,, et proximis dentibus faltem 
triplo longiori. 

Montanum caulibus angulato-ftriatis, multifloris ; foliolis iifdem ac 
in Trifolio rubenti j fpicis pedunculatis ; perianthio glabriuf- 

culo^ 



three Species of Trifolium. 237 

culo, dentibus quatuor fupcrioribus aequalibus, infimo parum 
longiori ; corollis tetrapetalis albis, vexillo fubulato. 
Pannonicum caulibus fubangulatis^ fsepe ramoHs; ftipulis fubulatis 
ciliatis ; foliolis utrinque vUlofis, obfoletd venofis ; fpicis majo- 
ribus pedunculaitis ; dentibus perianthii quatuor fuperioribus 
fubxqualibu&vel inferioribus binis parum longioribus; corollis 
albidis. His, prxter alia^ etiam diiiert Trlfolium ocbroUucum pan* 
nonico fimillimum^ 

2^ Tri FOLIUM medium J fpicis laxis, corollis fubac- 
qualibus^ ftipulis fubulatis conniventibusy caulibus 
flexuofis ramofis. 

Trifolium medium. Linn. Fn. Suec. ed. 2, p. 558* Hudf. 

AngL ed. i, p. 284. Jenk. Brit. PL p. 1 78. 
Trifolium flexuofum. Jacqu. Aujir. iv. p. 45, • tab. 386^ 

AUitm. Pedem. 1. p. 305, n. llt)5. Wither. Bot. Arr. ed. 

Stok. p. ji^c^j fq, ♦ 
Trifolium. alpeftre. Crant%. Auftr. Fafc. v. p. 4D7, ». 5. * 

Scop. Cam. ed. 2, tom. ii. p. 79, n. 924. * Leerf. Herborn. 

p. 160, n. 575. ♦ Ligbtf. Scot. p. 406. ♦ Rob/. Brit. FL 

p. 137, n. 8. Po//. Palat. 'torn. ii. p. 335, n. 702. * MulL 

FL Dan. Fafc. xiT. pt. 3, tab. 662. Hudf. AngL ed. 2,, 

p. 326. Ret%. Prodr. p. 141, n. 819. LiebL Fuld.p. 303, 

fq. * Relh Cant. p. 281, n. 539. ♦ 
Trifolium pratenfe jS. Gort. Belg.ed. i^p. 212, et ed. lyp. 195. 
Trifolium, n. 6. * Doerr. Najf. p. 23a 
Trifolium fpicis villofis, foliis infidentibus, vaginarum 

caudis latioribus. Hall. Stirp. p. 585, n. 12. * Boehm. 

^(^ /• '^iS^ «• 318. * 2Vw/i. jEr/on/. /. 155, n. 5. * 

Gattenh. Heidelb. p. 177* 

Trifolium. 



A 



138 Mr. AranusV Htjlwy of 

ft 

Trifolium corollb monc^talis asqualibusy fpicis fubro- 

tundisy ftipulis LanceolatiS) foliis integerrimis. Scop. 

Cam. ed. i, f. 525 > n. 3^ * 
Trifolium foliis ovatis nervofis, fupremis conjugatis, va-* 

ginis knceol^6. HaH Hi/l. iom. i. fi. 163, n. 376. * 
Trifolium pratenfe purpureum majus* Ray. H^. i. p. 944, 

«. 3. * Et ejufikm Syfh ed. I, p. 134, n. 5. * 
Trifolium purpureum majus, foliis longioribus ct angufti- 

oribuS) floribus faturatioribus. Ray. Syn. ed. 2, p. 194^ 

n. 6, * et ed. 3, p. 328, n. 7. * Toumef. Injl. p. 404. 

Boerh. Lugd. ed. 2, P. 2,/. 31, «. 8. ^/^ j^y^./. 210, 

«.7. * Hill. Brit. p. ^%i.^ 
Trifolium flore rubro majus^ folio maculofo. hind. JVtkJb. 

p. 38. (^d. 1716.) 
Trifolium mpntanum purpureum majus, C* BL Rupp. Jeru 

ed. X^p. 247 ; ct ^d. 2, p. 207. ♦ 

DuBia. 

Trifoliuin alpeftre. (x/w^/. Tuiing.p.idS. Sc&oll.Sari.p.i68, 
n. 595. * ItHdttkfch. Fl. Stl. p. 165, /1.S42. * Et ^/^^^w 
Enum. p. l86^ «. 690. * lUicb. Moeno^Franc. P. 2, ^^ 46, 
*. 521. Willderu Berol p. 242, «. 749, 

Trifolium fpicis villofis fubovatis, caule ereiSlo, foliis 
ovato-oblongis integerrimis^ Roy. Lugd. p. 380* 
n. 21. 

Trifolii pTatenfis altera fpeci^s major* Gefn. Hort. p. 285. 

Habitat in locis ficciof ibus elatis, praHertim fruticofis, lylveftribua 
cretaceis et argillofis» in Anglia. Scotia, Suecia, Dania, Auftria^ 
Carniolia, Pedemontio, Hollaildia, Helvetia, ct variis Germaniae 
partibus, 

7 Radi:i 



ih'te Species of Jr^oilw9k 439 

Jtidfx oblique defceadens^ infra telhirem repensi fuico-cineraf- 
ccns. 

Caules fuffruticulofi, infem^ abliqui? fubtrigoni (ficcafri exaft^ tri- 
goni), fuperne ereAiufcuK teretes^ geniculata-flexuofi, ramofi : 
ramis e tumore axillari callofo adfuFgentibuSyfaturate^virides, 
interdum hie illic rubentes* 

Stipula tongsE, fubulatae, 3 — 5 nerves, gkbnr, ciHatx, a caule di- 
vergentes, inter fe conniventes, vaginantes : vaginis anguftatis, 
fubamplexicaulibus, margine utdnque re£bis>. initio villoiisy, 
dein glabris ciliatis^ 

Fetioli insequales^ inferiores ftipulis multo longiorea, fuperiores 
fere brcviores^ omnea fubdivergentes, 

Foliola inasqualia^ initio et inferne ovata^ dein ot medio oblonga^ 
tandem et fuperni feri lanceolata et faepe fubattenuata, folio- 
i^wm infimorum rouko minora obtufiffima et interdum retufa,. 
reliquorura majora et acutiora^ omnia fupra obfoletius fubtus 
evidentim venofa, fupra etiam lunulis binis pallidis longitudi* 
xialibus et ad apices contiguis frequenter notata, verfus oras e 
venis concurrentibus^ fubftriata, margine villis pluribus long\- 
ulculis appreffis inftrufta^ ad ta6tum vix fcabra, ocuUs nudis 
integerrima, fed armatis tenuiiBmd denticuiata^ prasferdm in. 
foliis fuperioribu^^ 

Spha initio fpheroides, tandem globofa vtl oralis^ folkaria veL 
gemina ; alterS plerumque ferius florente, feffilis vel pedun- 
culata, una vel utraque ; pedunculis insequalibus, unico vel 
duobua foliis floralibus fuffulta ut plnrimum dependentibus*. 

Floret divergentes, laxe imbricati. 

Perianthium compreffiufculum, glabrum vel rarius pildfum, palli- 
dum etfaep^hic illic purpurafcens, jH^fertim in fpicse vertice: 
flriis faturat^viridibuset interdum purpureis. Dw/^j virides et 

plerumque 



1 



240 Mr. Afzelius'j Hijlory of 

plerumque fimul qua partem rubcntcs, fuper tores bini aequales 
et tubo perianthii breviotes, inferiores bini eti^^m sequales fed 
fuperioribus longiores et tubum perianthii vcl aequantes vel 
paullum excedentes, infimus longitudine tubi corollas, fed prox- 
imis dentibus multo, non tamen duplo, longior. 

Corolla odorata : vcxillo alis vix longiore fubmucronato, ftriis fa- 
turatius purpureis inftru6io ; alis paliidioribus carini parum 
longiorrbus. 

Dijirt a Trifolio alpeftri abnndanter, ut e defcriptione utriufquc 
comparata facile patet. Sed f)rasterea ab eo etiam diftinguitur 
fartibus plurimis majoribus et colore obfcuriori praeditis ; 
radice magis lignofa et terras tenaciiis inhaerente ; caulibus dif- 
fufiset vix umquam iQX\X.zx\\%\ jllpulh latioribus, ut et vaginis, 
quae venis infuper crebrioribus gaudent fsepiufque purpureis ; 
pettoUs fubpilofis et non villofi^; folio florali faepius unico; 
foUolts multo latioribus et plerifque oblongis, fubtus glau- 
cefcentibus nervoque minori inftrudlis, verfus eras obfo- 
letius ftriatis : fplca donee integra floreat, vertice deprefla, et 
plantse cultae minori ; perianthio ftriis magis elevatis reftnotil'que, 
dentibus minus pilofis et infimo proportione breviori, utpote 
longitudinem dentium proximorum duplam non attingente; 
corolla dilutius purpurea, praefertim in alis, et ceteroqui 
qua magnitudinem forroamque fimillima illis in Trifolio 
rubentL 

3. Tripolium pratenfe^ fpicis denfis, corollis inaequa- 
libus, dentibus calycinis quatuor aequalibus^ ftipulis 
ariftatis, caulibus adfcendentibus. 

Trifolium pratenfe. Linn. Spec. Plant, ed. i, p. 768, ♦ et 
^d. a, p. 1082. * Flor. Suec. cd. 2, p. 259, n. 666: * 



ihree Species of Trjfo/ium, 441 

Sy/. Nat. cd. 10, torn. ii. p. 1177, ct cd. 12, torn. ii. 
p. y>2., ManU Plant, ii. p. 451. Murr. Syji. Veg. ed. 13, 
p. 572, et ed. 14, p. 688. Rnch. Syfi, Plant, P .iii. 
p. 552.* • Kfdph, Cent, i. n. 91. MIL DiSt. ed. 8, n. i. 
Hudf, Angl, ed. I, p. 284, et ed. 2, p. 325. Neck, Gallo- 
Belg. torn. ii. p. 315. GmeL Sib. torn. iv. p. 22, n. 29.* 
Crantz* Aujlr, .v. p. 407, n. 6. * Scopj Cam. ed. 2, torn. ii. 
p. 79, n. 923. • Pieffi, Botan, Leers. Herborn, p. 160, 
n. 574. * Ligbtf, Scot. p. 404. ♦ PoU^ Palat. torn. ii. 
p. 333, n. 701. * Mattufch. Fl, Sil. p. 159, n. 541. * 
Doerr. Najf, p. 235, n. 5. * Zom, Icon. cent. i. p. 56*, 
tab. 93. Gattenb. Heidelb, p. 177. * Liebl. Fuld. p. 302. * 
. Cappel, Helm/l, p. 126, fq. • Relh. Cant, p. 280, n. 538. ♦ 
Witber. Bot, Arr. ed. Stok. p. 794, fq. * 
Egemlpb, Imag, p. 139 (ed. ut vid. tert. fine impr. anno) 
et ejufd. Effig. p. 144 (ed. 1562}. Lonic, Hifi, torn. i. 
p. I04f (ed, Lat. 1551) et ejufdem Herb. P. ii. p. 180, 
fig. fin, (ed. Germ. 1564), p. 249, fig. fin. (ed. Germ. 
UfFenbach. 1630, alt. 1679, et Ehrhart..i737). Trag» 
Hifi. p, 586. Dodon. Imag. P. ii. p. 39 (ed. 1554 et 1559) 
ct ejufd. Hi/l. p. 338 (ed. Gall. 1557), p. 423 (ed. Belg. 
1563), p. 494 (ed. Angl. 1578). Mattb. Comm. p. 394 (ed. 
Lat. 1554), p. 439 (ed. Lat. 1559), p. 835 (ed. Lat. 
1565), p. 883 (ed. Ital. 1568 et 1604), p. 609 (ed. Lat. 
C. Bauh. 1598, et alt. 1674), p. 321 (ed. Gall. 1620, 
p. Pinet.), p. 330 (ed. Gall. alt. 1680), p. 4^1 (ed. Ital. 
1621 et 17 1 2). Camer. Epit. p. 582. Tabernam, Herb. 
P. ii. p. (ed. 1588), p. 235 (ed. G. Bauh. 1613), 

p. 125 (ed. ejus alt. 1625)^ P* 9^8 (ed. Hier. Bauh. 
1664, et alt. 1731), et ejufd. Icon. p. 523, Ger, Herb. 



042 Mn. AfzeliusV Uipory of 

p* 10 17, n. I.* Bech. Pom. P. S. PbythoL p. 384. 

Lagun. Dio/eor. p. 341 . Zmpg^ ^heatr. p. 748. 

Trifolium pratenfe i. Mattb. Comm. p. 472 (ed* Gall. 

1572, p. Monlm)* Durant. Herb. L MoruSamt. p. 10 14 

(ed. Germ, UjSenix 1619). 

Trifolium pratenfe i. Maftthioli, Daki^L Hijl. P. 2, 

p. 1354 (ed. JLat. 1587), p. 241 ^ed. Gdl. 161 5). 
Trifolium fpici« villofis, caulc difFufo^ foliolis integerrimis. 
Litrn. HorU Cliff, p. 375, n. 16.* Virid. Cliff, p. 76* 
FL Suec. ed. i, p. 222, n. 615. Roy. Lugd. p. 380^ 
n. 20. Dulib. P^ryi p. 221:^ 
Trifolium fpicis villofiSy foliis infidentibi^, vaginarum 

caudis capillaribus. HalL Stirp. p. 585, n. 14. * 
Trifolium coroUis monopetalis inaequalibus^ fpicis fubro* 
tundis, ftipulis fetaceisy foliis intcgerrimis. Scop. Carn. 
td. If p. 524^ n. I. * 
Trifolium caule obliquo^ foliis ovatis hirfutis, fupremis 
conjugatis^ vaginis ariftads. HalL Hifi. toio. i p. 163^ 
n. 377. * 
Trifolium vulgare. Bliaciw. Herb, tab* 20w 
Trifolium. Roeff Herb. p. 297. Eg^nolph. Imag. p. 10 (ed.. 
'SS^)- -Di?^- Baian. p.a88, D. (ed. Lat. 1540). Rivifu 
Teir. tab. 1 1, fig. fm. 
Trifolium pratenfe putpur^um.. Fucbf. Hiji. p. 817 (ed* 
Lat. 1542) et ejufd. Herb. t^ih^J^S (ed. Germ. 1543. 
Turn. Herb. P. ii. p. 157$ (ed. 1562 et 1568). RuS^ 
Hort.UpJ. p. 40 (ed. 1666), p. iii (ed. 1685). Ray. HiJi. 
i. p. 943, n. 2. * Magnol. Cbaradt. p. 293. * Wilf. Syru 
p. 209, n. 4. ♦ Kmrr. ^befmr. P. iL p. 121, fq. ♦ 
tab. T. 3. 
7 Trifolium 



tbn4 Spec'm »f Trifoliwa, S43 

Trifolium purpureum. Rjff. I, Riv. Diofcor. p. 258 (ed. 

'543)> P« ^57 («<*• »S49)' %*«• ^"^g' P* "6 (ed. 

1546). 
Trifolium pratenfe alterum. Mattb. Comp. p. 522. 
Trifolium purpureum vulgare, BauL Hj/i. ii. p. 374 
Trifdium pratenfe flore purpureo. Frank. SpecuL 
Trifolium flore purpureo. 5??//. Jhoenu 
Trifolium pratenfe purpureum minus, folio maculofo. 

Und. Wihjb. p. 38 (ed. 17 16). 
Trifolium pratenfe, flore monopetalo. J'ournef. Injlit. 

p. 404. Boerb. Lugd. ed. 2, P. ii. p, 31, n. 7. Zannicb. 

yior. p. 264, n. I, • tab. 185. Linn. FL Lapp. p. 221, 

n. 273; 
Trifolium pratenfe rubrum. Weinm. Phyi. Iconogr. vol. iv. 

N^98o.J^. 
Triphylloides pratcnfis, flore purpurea PonteJL Antbol. 

p. 241. Segu. Feron. vol. i. p. 274. 
Epithymum. Dorfi. Botan. p. 114. 
Var. j8. fativa. Hall. Stirp. p. 586, et Hiji. i. p. 163. 

Trifolium pratenfe. f^abl. Ft. Dan. Fafc. xvii. p. 6, 

tab. 989. 
Trifolium pratenfe > HuJf. Angl. ed. ij p. 284, et ed. 2, 

p- 325. Wither. Bot. Arr. ed. Stok. p. 795. * 
Le Trefle. SpeSl. de la Nat. tom. iii. Icon. A. ad p. 26 

(ed. 1735)- 
Trifolium purpureum majus fativum, pratenfi (imilc. 

Ray. Syn. ii. p. 194, n. 5, * et ed. 3, p. 328, n. 6. * 

mif. Syn. p. 210, n. 6. * Hill. Brit. p. 381. * 
Var. y. flore albo. Hall. Hi/l. i. p. 164, cfr. Mattufch. Enum. 

p. 1 86, n, 689. fFitber. Bot. Arr. ed. Stok. p. 795, 

I i 2 Dubia. 



344 ^** A^^ELiusV I^ory ef 

Dubia. 

Trifoliura pratenfe purpureum. Bauh. Pin. p. 327* ^ 
Trifolium. Ort. Sank. cap. 476 (ed. 1426 et 15 17). 
Brunella. Brutf. Herb. torn. iii. p. 26. 

Habitat in pratis et pafcuis per totam Europam copiose ; etiam itt 
Sihtnz^ Gmelinj et America Septentrionali, Herb. Banks. Locis 
pinguioribus, humidiufculis et apricis praefertim laetatur j nee 
tamen fterilia, ficciora atque umbrofa refpuit. 

^dix fer^ perpendiculariter defcendens, infra tellureniYixrepcns,. 
granulata, cinerea. 

Cauks adfcendentes, infernfi altero latere planiufculi (ficcati tri- 
goni)', ceterum teretes, fuperne ftriati, faepius fubramofi ; ra- 
mulis patentibus^ tumore axillari deAitutis; virides^ rarius rubi--^ 
cundt3-tin6ti. 

Stipula breves, latae, venofae, glabrae, conniventes, arijftatae: arifta 
capillar! viridi apice praefertim pilofa, vaginantes : vaginis di- 
latatis, amplexicaulibus, margine utrinc^ue arcuatis, glabrls^ 
rarius fubpilofis. 

Petioli inaequales, plerumque lon^iCmi et Itipulis multoties Ion- 
giores, patentes. 

FoHola inaequalia,. ovata vel ovalia, obtufa, foliorum. infimorum 
multo minora, fere orbiculata, retufa,. omnia fupra deprefl(>- 
fubtus elevato-venofa, fupra etiam macula centrali fubfagittata 
pallida plerumque notata, fubciliata, integerrima vel interdum^ 
leviter et acute crenulata. 

Spica ovata,, obtufa, folitaria vel rariflime gemina, interdum- 
pedunculata, plerumque vero feffilis intra folia duo floralia 
oppofita eredta. 

Flares ere6ti,. dense imbricati. 

Perianthium fericeum, pallidum et interdum qua partem purpu* 

reum : ftriia faturate viridibus vel rubris, rarius fufcis. Denies 

5 virides 



Aree Species of frifoHum. 045 

Tirides ct fsep^ magis minufque rubentes, fuperiores quatuoi? 
aequales, longitudine tubi perianthii, i^imus paullo longior,. 
fed tubo corollae brevior, fruftu maturo ilH patentiffimiy /&/c 
creftus. 

Corolla odorata: vexillo alis longiore truncato et faep8 emarginato,. 
ftriis faturatius purpureis inftnitSta ; alis pallidioribus, caring 
longioribus. 

Vjfert a Trifolio medio vehementer, xxt comparata utriufque de- 
fcriptio facile evincit, fed infuper huic etiam eft diffimile radios 
mult6 minori; caulibus non fiexuofis, plantae fpontaneae humi- 
lioribus, magis prociimbentibus,faepe folitariis, habd raro fimpli^ 
ciffimis, ramulifque fi adfunt paucioribus ; Jtipulh parvis et 
aliter formatis; vaginh mult6 majoribus^ non ciliatis^ et fspius^ 
rubro- vel fufco- venofis; foliis floralibus femper binisj 
foliolls brevioribus, plerifque ovatis, obtufioribus, faepius 
albido-maculatis, obfoletius venofis j fapra venis plants 
viva dcpreffis, ficcatae vero pauUulum elevatis j /pica minori, 
mult6 rarius pedunculata geminaque, et vertice non (Jeprefla j 
^r/^;7/A/(9 nunquam prorfus glabro; corolla m\nox\^ miilt6 magi& 
inaequali^ plerumque pallidius puq^urea, fattem alis apice non,. 
ut in Trifolio medio, coloratioribus ; vexillo anguftiorij et 
tandem quod prius floreat. 

Var. /3. planta agreftimult6 major magifque glabra, caulibus phiri- 
bus; foliolisacutioribus; fpica faspius pedunculatanonadeoraro 
gemina ; perianthio plerumque villofiori, dente infimo propor- 
tione longiori ; vexillo alifque corollas magis divergentibus; ftylo 
frequenter br^viori; legumine faep^ difpermo. In hoc ftatu culto,. 
quum caules fmt diffufi et ad flexionem quafi tendant, e Ion-* 
ginqua I'rifolium rmdiunk adeo refert, ut pro eo facillirae. aqcipi 

queat ;, 



qufeSt} fffd ffrc^iori ivvfpaStione^ ftiptxHs prtcfcftiin deiiitibnfquc 

€a[ly6ini6 lorigd diveffi^ fi«e oik difficultatc poteft dignofcL 
Fdf-. y. noft nifi cetolUs alibis Affert, in fatjs interdooi tsccurrit, 

inter plantas agreftes mult6 rarior eft ; ex Anglias comitatu 

De^biAtg fttlitam vidi in Vkth* Batrks. 
Pr*t6r tifts varieta1i€B, "Trifriium prutenfe fdiolis ctiam qiaafternis, 

licet rariffime, reperiri, inter omnes conftat. 
^ m * ^ t^ iti 

IN examining ^rifolium atpefifej medium^ and pratenfcy I have found 
them agree in very marty refpe£ls* To prevent tautdld^, I have 
taken care to avoid mentioning in their defcriptfons any cifcum- 
ftance common to all th^fc three fpecies ; but, for the fake of a 
more complete knowledge of the genus, I fhafl here in one place 
enumerate them aU. However, as I have not had an opportunity 
of feeing "frifoU alfejlre living, I cannot with abfplute certainty 
cletenjiine the nature of its liamina, piftilla, feed-velfels, and feeds ; 
but what I Ihail mention with fefpeft to thefe parts of fructifica- 
tion, I have chiefly taken from TrifoL mediumy and particularly from 
the pratenfe. But as to the reft, I know they agree in the following 
circumftances. 

Radix perennis, teretiufcula, ramofa. 

Caules ex eadem riadice plerumque plures, fpithamaei, pedoles et 

ultra, fbliofi, infernd glabri, fupernfi villofi Vel magis minufvc 

pilofi. 
Folia altema, vaginis infidentia, pctiolata, ternata; floralia feffilia 

vel breviter pcdunculata, plerumque duo oppofita; altero 

fempcr minore. 
Vagina membranace», integerrim*, ochroleucee^ nervc^o-venofae 

{yafis 



lidibus vfA piiirpureis^ et i» Trifotep preidH^ iaS^r^.^ai fufcis)^ 
«QEsi9aat» P^cTftz/t? mtM:flMdi9» ^ QScj^rFeo^ js^ ^ffi^l^ l^fterales 
integerrimas ct virides, in TfifoJjo »J4i9SS^ Jira/^ fy^ f ubro- 

ampliores. 
P^//W/ fupra canaliculati^ ceterum ftriatuli, Tillofi vel magis mif 

nufve pilofu 
FoUola fubfeflilia^ nervofo-vcnofa ut vagina, fupra glabra fubtus 

fubvillofa, inprimis juniora, et pallidiora; floralia minora an-* 

guftiora et plerumque lanceolata- 
Spica terminales : floribus feflilibus^ in rachi fubangulata aphylla. 

villofa* 
Perianthium turbinato-cylindricum, monophyllum, tubulofum^ 

abbreviatum, inferum^.perfiftens^^decemftriatum; flriiselevatis;, 

quinquedentatum j dentibus finu rotundato rcmotis, feta- 

ceis, pilofis, re6lis, infimo interdum adfcendenti in Trifolio 

medio^ et forfan etiam alpeJirL 
Corolla monopetala, purpurea, marcefcens, papilionacea ; vex- 

illo reflexo alifque patentibus obtufis, carina coloratiore. 
FUamenia decern, hyalina,. apice virefcentia, unum totum li- 

berum capillare, novem in. membranam germeR invol- 

ventem inferne connata, fuperne libera, primum fubulata 

et dein apice incraflata. 
Anihera fubrotundae incumbentes flavae. 
Germen ovatum vel oblongum glabrum virefcens. 
Stylus unicus, deorfum attenuatus, adfcendens, hyalinu$> 
Stigma fimplex deflexum obtufum prafinum. 
Legumen ovale vel oblongum comprefliufculum glabrum mono* 

fpermum, 



14^ Mr. ArzBLiosV Hiftory of three Species ofTrifoKum. 

fpermum, in perianthio, cnjus faucem fquamulas ciaudunt, 
occultatum corollaque emarcida ciniSlum^ atque ftylo per- 
iiftente mucronatum, in latere verfus apicem dehifcens^ fcmine 
mature cinerafcens vel flavicans. 
Semen fubreniforme^ comprefiiufculumy glabrum^ nitidum, fub- 
iiavefcens* 



XXVI. Jn 



( 449 > 



XXVI. An Account offeveral Plants prefented to the Linnean Society^ at 
different T^imes^ by Mr. John Fairhairn and Mr. Thomas Hoy, Fellows 
of the Linnean Society. By the Prefident. 



G 



Read March i, 1791. 



I. C O S T U S fpeciofus. 



lOSTUS foliis fubtus fericeo-villofis. 
C* arabicus. Jacqu, Ic, Ran vol, i. /. i« Collet, vol, u 

143- 
Bankfea fpeciofa. Konig. Mmandr. 75. 

Tsjana-kua. Rheed. Mai. vol. xi. 15, /. 8 ? 

Herba fpiralis hirfuta. Rumpb. AttJ>. vol, vi. 143, t, 64, 

/. I ? 

Native of the Eaft Indies. 

Flowered in Sion Gardens in 1790. A&-. Htyy. v 

This fine pdant has been very improperly confounded with the 
Goftus arabicus of Linnseus. The latter is the fpecies defcribed in 
his Hortus ClifFortianus, of which a drawing by Ehret is in the 
library of Sir Jofeph Banks, but its fynonyms are even in that 
work much confufed. It is probable there may be many fpecies 
comprehended under thoie fynonyms, nor is our prefent knowledge 

K k of 



^50 Dr. SMiTH*i Account of Plants 

of the fubje6l fufficient to extricate their differences. The above 
fpecific character is propofed for the prefent, for want of a better. 

It is doubtful whether the above fynonym of Hort. Mai. belongs 
to this fpecies, though much refembling it, except that in that 
figure the lower lip of the corolla is perfectly entire, in ours it 
is trifid and undulated. 

Rumphius^s Herba fpiralis hlrfuta may be our plant ; but who 
can judge from his miferable diminifhed figures in fo nice a 
point ? 

Profeflbr Jacquin*s magnificent figure, and full defcription, render 
all further obfervations unneceffary ; except that he has omitted 
to mention the fpiral contortion of the ftem, remarkable in this 
plant, and which has led us to the application of Rumphius's 
fynonym. 



a. STATICE latifolia. 

.i . . 

Statice fcapo panicul^to rambfiffimo fcabro, foliis pu- 

befcentibus, pilis fafciculato-ftellatis. 
Limonium folio Enulas, flabellis tenuiflimis ramofiflimis, 
•floribus parvis caeruleis. Gerber. MSS. Herb. Linn. 

Firft gathered by Gerber in RuflSian Tartary, on 
the banks of the river Don, near Afoph. 

Flowered in Sion Gardens in 1788. Mn Hoy. u 

Leaves all radical, oblong, a foot or more in length, entire, 
nightly undulated, fometimes emarginated, pubefcent and 
fort to the touch, being fprinkled all over with little ftellated 
fafciculi of foft (hort hairs. 

Sta/is very much branched, and fprcading in every diredlion, 
covered with the fame kind of pubefcence as the leaves, 

but 



prefented hy Meffrs. Fairbairn and Hoy. 251 

but rather more harfh ; branches roundifh^ alternate^ termi- 
nating in Ample horizontal racemi. BraSieie fmalU concave^ 
acute, two together at each divifion of the panicle, one of 
which is placed on the outfide of the branch at its bafe^ and 
the other in its axilla. 

F/ott/^j moftly tViro together^ emerging from two fmall braSlece^ 
like thofe. on the ftalk ; but furnilhed alfo with two larger 
and more obtufe hraSiea^ with a large membranous margin. 

Calyx tubular, membranous, five-toothed, whitilh, with five 
green angles. 

Corolla longer than the calyx, blue. 

Anthera yellow. 

This fpecdfis fliould be placed after Statice Limonium« 

3. S E M P E R V I V U M ftellatum. 

Sempervivum caule herbaceo pubefcente, foliis fpatulatis 

fparfis; 
Sedum petraeum rotundifolium, flore luteo ftellato Montis 
Baldi. Seguier. Veron. vol. ii. 360, /. 17. 

Found by John Baptift Scarella, on the rocks of 
Mount Baldus. Seguier. 

Abundant in Chelfea GardcUji where it flowers 
every year. Mr. Fairbairn. o 

This whole plant is, as it were> a reprefentation in miniature of 
Sempervivum arboreum, but more lax and difFufe. It is abundantly 
diftinguifhed from that fpecies by its annual root, herbaceous pu- 
befcent ftem, and fpreading pianicle. The flowers are yellow, and 
agree perfeftly with the generic chara6ler of Sempervivum,, not 
with that of Sedum. 

K k i M 



»5X Dr. SmithV Account ofThnts 

If the fynonytn of Seguier above quoted be right, ^iw kamfrom 
thence the native country of this plant, which has long been cul- 
tivated at Chelfea; but from whence it was brought is not 
known. 

This Sempervivum is extremely different froin the Sedum alfi- 
naefolium of AUioni ; but may perhaps be the Sempervivum aipinum 
Montis Baldi^ foliis lenticulatisj Jloribus non punSatisy of Mauritius 
Hoffman, mentioned by that author in his Specimen Pedenumtanum^ 
/• i6. 

4. ASTRAGALUS leucophasus^ ; 
Astragalus caulefcens procumbens, leguminibusfub- 
cylindricis reiSlis glabris, fpUolis obcordatis fubtus 
villofis. 

Communicated by Mr. Fairbaim from Chelfea 
Garden, 1788. U 

The native country of this Aftragalus is unknown. It appears 
to be an old inhabitant of Chelfea Garden, and was marked with 
the name of Aflragalus pilofus in Miller's Herbarium. It has, 
however, no affinity to the A. pilofus of Linnaeus, nor does it even 
agree with the defcription of that plant in Miller's Di6tionary. 

Our plant is allied to A. hamofus ; but differs from that fpecies 
in having rounder leaves, more flowers in a fpike, and efpecially 
in having Itraight, not recurved, pods, only haif the length of thofc 
of A. hamofus. 

5. MIMOSA myrtifolia. 
Mimosa foliis ovato-lanceolatis obliquis undulatis acu* 
minatis margine cartilagineis : primordialibus pinnatis* 

Raifed 



prtfenttd by Mejfrs. Fairbaim and Hoy. 253 

Raifed from feeds brought from New South 
Wales, in Sion Gardens, where it flowered in 1790. 
Mr^ Hoy. h 

The Branches are fomewhat angular. 

Leaws alternate, oblique, of a glaucous green, very much undu- 
lated, and near two inches in length, with a ftrong central 
rib# 

Floufers on the young branches very numerous, fragrant like 
thofe of Spiraea Ulmana, and growing three or four together^ 
in little heads. 

Calyx fmall, green, obfoletely ciliated. 

Corolla gi-eenilh white, fometimes reddifh, of four petals. 

Stamina numerous. 

6. MIMOSA fuaveolens. 
Mimosa foliis linearibus acuminatis re6tis margine carti- 
lagineis : primordialibus pinnatis, ramis triquetris. 

Flowered I790,in Sion Gardens, from feeds brought 
from New South Wales. Mr. Hoy. ^ 

The Branches are moft acutely triangular, and much comprefled; 

their edges bright red. 
Leaves alternate, four or five inches long, with a rib and margin 

like the laft. 
Flowers in axillary racemiy yellowifh white, fragrant, of four 

petals. 
Stamina numerous. 

Young Capfules fmooth and glaucous. 

This fpecies, as well as the preceding one, belongs to that 

Angular tribe of Mimofas, for the knowledge of which we are 

6 indebted 



a54 ^*- Smith'j Account of PlantSj &c. 

indebted to the fouthem hemifphere, all which have totally 
different leaves in their adult ftate from what they produce at 
firft fpringing out of the ground. The feedling plants bear 
conjugated pinnated leaves, like mod of this genus ; but the 
common footftalks of the fucceeding leaves being gradually 
dilated, at length lofe their foliola, and affume the appearance 
of fimple entire leaves; nor does the tree afterwards produce 
any other. We have no defcription of the feedling leaves of 
Mimofa fimplicifolia (Linn. Suppl.)^ hut it is probable they alfo are 
at firft of the pinnated kind* 



XXVII. 



( 455 ) 



XXVII. ExTRACTsyr^/;! the Minute Book of the Linne^n Society. 



November 4, TV 4^^* DRYANDER communicated to the 
1788* XVX Society, from Sir Jofeph Banks, Bart, a 
fpecimen of an incomplete Bupreftis ; fent to Sir Jofeph 
from the Committee of Warehoufes of the Eaft India 
Company, on account of the damage it had done to a bale 
of muflins. It was found in its prefent ftate on opening 
a bale of piece goods received from Bengal, and appeared 
to have eaten through fifteen pieces of muflin, of eight or 
ten folds in each piece, making itfelf a paffage of about its 
own fize. 

This Bupreftis, in fize, fhape, imprefled luml(^ of the 
thorax, ihield, and canaliculated abdomen, exa6lly refembles 
the Bupreftis canaliculata Fabr. Mant. p. i8t, n. 58, but 
differs in colour. The B. canaliculata wants the two golden 
ipots on the thorax, which this has, like thofe of B. vittata. 
The abdomen of B. canaliculata is bright purple on the upper 
fide ; in this it is of a ftiining green, appearing in certain 
lights of a dark blue. The under fide of the fame part 
is in B. canaliculata of a dull copper colour, in this of a bright 
green. 

The B. canaliculata is faid to come from Africa ^quinoSHalis 

(Sierra 



256 ExruAcrs froin the Minute Book 

(Sierra Leona) ; but that refts entirely on the authority of the 
label in Sir Jofeph Banks's coUeftion, which may poffibly 
be erroneous. 

Of forty fpecies of Bupreftis in the cabinet of Sir Jofeph 
Banks, none but the B. canaliculata has all the joints of the 
abdomen canaliculated ; nor is fuch a fhield to be found 
except in that fpecies and another, defaibed from the fame 
cabinet by Mr. Fabricius, during his laft (lay in England, 
under the name of quadridentata. 

December 2, 1788. The Prefident laid before the Society a 
drawing of a Angular Pidgeon, accompanied with the fol- 
lowing letter from Mr. .Latham. 

" Deaji Sir, 

a With this you will receive an accurate drawing, by 
•^ Mr. Lewin, of a Lufus Naturae in a dove-houfe Pidgeon, 
^^ now in my colledlion. 

** All I know of the hiftory of this extraordinary produc- 
^* tion is, that, a few years fmce, a'perfon employed to take 
** all the young birds from their holes, for the ufe of the 
" table, obferved this fingular fpecimen in one of the nefts, 
** along with another fledged in the ufual manner, the pro- 
*^ duce of one hatch. His curiofity being excited, he brought 
*• it into the houfe ; where it lived for a month or longer, 
<* and then died. 

^* The peculiarity of this fubje6t confifts in its not having 
^ a fingle complete feather on any part of its body, although 
" entitled from its age to have been fully fledged ;-infl:ead of 
" which, eveiy feather is ftill inclofed in a cafe the whole of 

«Mts 



of the Linnean Society. 257 



cc 



its length, which in fome of the greater quills amounts to fix 
^^ inches. Indeed a kind of fringe appears at the ends of moft of 
" the feathers ; and, on diffedling a feather, the (haft is found 
^^ by no means deftitute of web, but the latter is confined 
•^ merely by the furrounding fheath. It can fcarcely have 
" efcaped the notice of an obferver, that when a new feather 
** firft makes its appearance on the body of a bird, a tender 
** filmy fubftance environs and defends it, during its infant 
** Hate. But no fooner does the web increafe to any ftrength, 
^' than the film gives way, and the feather continues to grow 
^^ to its perfe6t maturity, 

** That this difeafe did not occafion the bird's death, I am 
*^ certain ; as it appeared healthy and well during the time it 
« lived. 

*^ I fhall be happy if the above fhort hiftory and drawing 
** fhould prove worthy the notice of the Linnean Society. 

*^ I am, &c. 
(Signed) « JOHN LATHAM." 

Dartford, 
November 4, 1788. 

March 2, 1790. The Prefident exhibited fome defcriptions in 
Italian, accompanied with rude drawings, of feveral rare 
plants found near Bologna in 1652, appearing to be an 
original manufcript of Zannoni, the property of Mr. Thomas 
F. Forfter, jun. of Threadneedle Street. 

F I I? I S. 



Directions for placing the plates. 

Tab. !• PHAL-ffiNA B- Lubricipeda, &c. to face page 75 

2. Flowers of Cypripedium ■ ■ ■ ■ 80 

3. Ditto ' * • ^ 80 

4. Lichens ■ . ■ ■ 84 

5. Curculio Lapathi et Silpha grifea » 89 

6. Stylephorus chordatus — > 92 

7. Hirudo viridis — • ' - ■' ' 9^ 

8. Canclla alba — • 1 — 102 

9. Cancer ftagnalis — ■ > no 

10. Feftuca fpadicea from Rudbeck * 117 

Table of the Appearance and Difappearance of 

Birds ■■ ' • ■ I 121 

11. Tringa Gl areola > » ■ — — 130 

12. Fucus fubfufcus ■ 1 « " ■ 134 

13. Spring in the Wings of Moths - »i 144 
J 4. Leaves of various Species of Begonias ■ 161 

15. Begonia humilis — — ■ ■ ■ 166 

16. — -« tenera — — 169 

.17, Echeneis lineata, p. 187 — Fafciola clavata, ditto-^ 

Hirudo branchiata, p. 188 — Phalaena tubercu- 

lana, p. 196 — and Phalsena Sparrmannella, p. 197 196 

1 8. Dillenia integra > 199 

1 9. retufa — — —- aoo 

2o» ■■ dentata ■ ■ ■ 201 



<t.C 




c c 




k. i 


cC^'. 


c <. 


4^*^ 


f < 


4Cj* 












c c < 









.r5<<; 



^^